l
■*v ' ‘
E
• /
T H
E
1
■
'
A,
s
E
O F
4
i /i
R
E L
v .. y .
A N
D’s
BEING BOUND BY
r s
of PAR
LIAM
E N 1
made
I N
N
G L
A N
D,
S T A T E D.
B Y
WILLIAM MOLYNEUX, of DUBLIN, ESQ.
1
ALSO,
A fmall Piece on the fubjeft of Appeals to the Lords of England,
by the fame Author,
- . U " '• ' "
NEVER BEFORE PUBLISHED;
TO WHICH ARE ADDED,
LETTERS
\ : >
r T O T H E
MEN of IRELAND,
B Y
OWEN ROE O’N I A L.
DUBLIN:.
I N TED INTHE YEAR M,DCC,LXXXII.
ini-
J
Editor’s Advertisement.
»
. V
t'rl
1 HE ptefent happy profpe&s opening to o'iir view, feem to pre¬
clude the neceflity of any publication that juftifies the restoration of
the conftitution or commerce of this kingdom : — But as the follow-
ing work was undertaken, when appearances were not fo encourag¬
ing; and nearly compleated, before the flattery of expectation was
gratified : The gentlemen, at whofe inlbance it was begun, defired
its completion, that Irifhmen, being put in pofFefiion of the bed ar¬
guments in Support of their liberty, may always be as attentive to
its prefervation, as they have been virtuous and Spirited in the ob¬
taining it.
The CASE was written Shortly after the Revolution ; and altho’
the rights of Ireland are there juftly afferted from hilbory, from
law, from policy, and nature, yet Such was the offence and jealoufy
it created in England, that a copy of it was burned there by the
hands of the common hangmah, previous to the Declaration of the
6th of George I.- — In this Edition much pains have been taken in ac¬
curately tranflating the Latin Quotations into Englifh, (which are
printed in Italic characters) to render it perfectly level to every
capacity.
The REASONS were written about the fame time tho’ not
published till the prefent occafion.
The merit of O’NIAL’s LETTERS is too well known to
require any reafons being affigned for their republication: — They
were the great Stimulants to the Spirit which pervades this kingdom,
and their frequent pmifal will prelerve it : — The liberality of Senti¬
ment, beauty of compofition, force of argument, and Spirit of pa-
triotiim, thro’ every page, will always endear them to the man of
tafle, and friend of his country.
Cj* To promote the laudable intentions of this publication, and
that it may be the more extenfively circulated, a large impreflion has
been printed, and the price reduced much below books of this Size.
June, 1782.
'"t
K
TO THE
I
N
G.
SIR,.; '! _
*H E expedition your Majefty undertook into England , to refcue thefts nations from arbitrary
power y and thcfe unjujl invaftons that were made on our religiony /aw, rights and liber¬
ties y was an aCtion in itfelf fo greaty and of fuch immenfe benefit to our diftrejfed countries ,
that ’ tis impsjftble to give it a' reprefentation Jo glorious as it deferves . Of all your Majefty’ t
kingdoms , none was more fcnfible of the happy effeCls thereof \ than your kingdom of Ireland y.
which from the depth of mifery and defpdtry is raifed by your Majejiy to a profperotus and
fiiurifbtng condition. And we prefume mojl humbly to implore the continuance of your Majefty' 's
graces to usy by protecting and defending thofe rights and liberties which we have enjoyed under
the crown op England for above five hundred years \ and which fome of late do endeavour t»
violate. Tour mojl excellent Majejiy is the common indulgent father of all your countries ; and.
has an equal regard to the birth-rights of all your children ; and will not permit the eldeft%
becaufi the JlrongeJly to encroach on the pojfejfions of the younger: Efpecially considering with
what duty y loyalty y and filial obedience , we have ever behaved ourjelves to your Majejiy ;
infomuchy that I take leave to ajferty that your Majejiy has not in all your dominions a peo¬
ple more united andjleady to your interefts than tie Proteftants of Ireland ; which has man's -
fefily appeared in all our aCtious and parliamentary proceedingSy fince your Majefty' s happy;
accejfion to the throne. To relieve the dtftrejfedy has ever been the peculiar character of your
Majejiy' s glorious family. The United Provinces have found this in your famous ancefiors ; and
all Europe has been fenjible of this in your royal perfion. To this end more particularly you
came into theje kingdoms , as your Majefty has been plea fed to declare : And as you have
ejlablijhed the rights and liberties ej England on a foundation thaty we hopey can never be
Jhaken \ Jo we doubt not but your facred Majefty will have a tender care of your poor fub-
jeds oj Ir eland y who are equally your fubjeClSy as the reft of your people*
Pardon y I moft humbly bejeecb your Majefty , my prefumptiony in appealing to you on this sc -
cafion ; Nothing but the dignity and weight of the fubjeCly tan eoicufe my boldnefs herein ; 'but
if that be confideredy it deferves the regard of the greatef Prince ; 'tis no lefts than the rights
and liberties of one of his kingdoms y on which their religiony their property , their all depends ;
and which they have enjoyed for five hundred years paft. Thisy I thinky I have clearly
Jhewn in the following leaves ; I am furty if myr management thereof \ were fuitable to the
jujlice of our caufey our friends of England can no longer doubt it.
At your Majejiy s feet thereforey I throw it and with it the unworthy author thereof.
May it phafe your Majefty 9
four Majefty s mojl dutiful, hjaly
And obedient SubjeCl and Servant ,
WILLIAM MOLYNEUX
P R E F A C E
T O T H E
D E R.
R E
IH A V E nothing to offer in this Preface, more than to let the
Reader know, how unconcerned I am in any of thofe particular
inducements, which might feem at this juncture to have occafi-
cncd the following difeourfe.
1 have not any concern in wool, or the wool-trade. I am no wife
interefted in the forfeitures, or grants. I am not at all folicitous,
whether the Bifhop, or Society of Derry recover the land they con-
teft about.
So that, I think, 1 am as free from any perfonal prejudice in this
caufe, as Vis poffiblc to expeft any man fhould be, that has an ef-
tate and property in this kingdom, and who is a Member of Parlia¬
ment therein. I hope therefore ’tis a public principle that has moved
me to this undertaking : I am fure, I am not confcious to myfelf of
any other intention.
I have heard it has been faid, that perhaps I might run fome ha¬
zard in attempting this argument ; but I am not at all apprehenfive
of any fuch danger : We are in a miferable condition indeed, if we
may not be allowed to complain, when we think we are hurt ; and
to give our reafons with all modefty and fubmiffion. But were it
otherwife, it would not in the lead: affe&, or dilcourage me in an at¬
tempt, where I think my caufe good, and my country concerned, and
where I am fully perfuaded, the true intereft of England is as deep¬
ly engaged, as the Proteftant intereft of Ireland.
Thegreat and juft council of England freely allows all addreffes
of this fort. To receive and hear grievances, is a great part of their
buftnefs ; and to redrefs them, is their chief glory. But this is not
to be done, till they are laid before them, and fairly ftated for their
confideration.
This I have endeavoured in the following paper. What fuccefs it
may have, I am not very folicitous about. I have done what I
thought was my duty, and commit the event to God Almighty, and
the wife council of England.
Dublin , Feb, 8,
1697-8.
W. MOLYNEUX.
ts®
■as
C
THE
A S
E
O F
R E
A N D’s
being bound by
ACTS of PARLIAMENT
MADE IN
ENGL AND.
STATED*
Introduction and occajton of this difquifttiom
I HAVE ever been fo fully perfuaded of the ftridt juftice of the par¬
liament of England, that I could never think that any of their pro-
ceedings, which might feem to have the leaft tendency to hardfhip oil
their neighbours, could arife from any thing but Want of due informa¬
tion, and a right Rate of the bufmefs under their confideration. The
want of which, in matters wherein another people are chiefly con-*
cerned, is no defeat in the parliament of England, but is highly
blameable in the perfons whofe affair is tranfa&ing, and who permit
that illullrious body of fenators to be mifinformed, without giving
them that light that might rectify them.
I could never imagine that thofe great abettors of their own liber¬
ties and rights, coiild ever think of making the leaft breach in the
rights and liberties of their neighbours, unlefs they thought that they
had right fo to do ; and this they might well furmife, if their neigh¬
bours quietly fee their inclofures invaded, without expoftulating the
matter at leaft, and fhewing reafons, why they may think that hard-
fhips are put upon them therein.
The confideration hereof has excited me to undertake this ctifqul-
fition, which I do with all imaginable diffidence of my own perfor-*
mance, and with the- moft profound refpeft and deference to that
( 8 )
augufl fenate. The prefent jun&ure of affairs, when the bufinefs of
Ireland is Under the confideration of both houfes of the Englifh par¬
liament *, feems to require this from fome perfon ; and feeing all
others filenf, I venture to expofe my own weaknefs, rather than be
wanting at this time to my country. I might fay indeed to mankind ;
for his the caufe of the whole race of Adam, that I argue: Liberty
feems the inherent right of all mankind ; and on whatsoever ground
any one nation can challenge it to themfelves, on the fame reafon may
the reft of Adam’s Children expeft it.
If what I offer herein feems to carry any weight, in relation to my
own poor country, I fhall be, abundantly happy in the attempt : But
if after all, the great council of England refolve the contrary, 1 fhall
then believe myfelf to be in an error, and with the loweft fubmiffion
afk pardon for my affurance. However, I humbly prefume I fhall
not be hardly cenfured by them, for offering to lay before them a fair
ftate of our cafe, by fuch information as I can procure ; efpecially
When at the fame time I declare my intention of a fubmiflive acquief-
cence in whatever they refolve for or againft what I offer.
Subjefi of this Enquiry
The fubjetf, therefore, of our prefent difquifition fhall be. How
' tail the Parliament of England may think it reasonable to
intermeddle with the affairs of Ireland, and bind us by
LAWS MADE IN THEIR HOUSE.
And feeing the right which England may pretend to, for binding us
by their atts of parliament, can be founded only on the imaginary
title of conqueft or purchafe, or on precedents and matters of record ;
we fhall enquire into the following particulars.
Firft, How Ireland became a kingdom annexed to the crown of
England. And here we fhall at large give a faithful narrative of the
firft expedition of the Britons into this country, and King Henry the
fecond’s arrival here, fuch as our befthiftorians’ give us.
Secondly, We fhall enquire, whether this expedition, and the
Englifh fettlement that afterwards followed thereon, can properly be
trailed a conqueft? Or whether any victories obtained by the Englifh,
in any fucceeding ages in this kingdom, upon any rebellion may be
call’d a conqueft thereof ?
Thirdly, Granting that it were a conqueft, we fhall enquire what
title a conqueft gives.
Fourthly, We fhall enquire what conceffions have been from time
to time made to Ireland, to takeoff what even the moft rigorous af-
fertors of a conqueror’s title do pretend to. And herein we fhall fhew
by what degrees the Englifh form of government, and the Englifh
ftatute laws, came to be received among us : And this fhall appear, to
be wholly by the confentof the people and parliament of Ireland.
Fifthly, We fhall enquire into the precedents and opinions of the
learned in the laws, relating to this matter, with oblervalions thereon.
* Bijhop of Derry in the Houfe of Lords , and prohibiting exportation of
»ur woollen manufacture in the Houfe of Commons •
( 9 )
Sixthly, We {hall confider the reafons and arguments that may be
farther offered on one fide and the other ; and mall draw fome gene¬
ral concluiions from the whole.
Britain’/ firji expedition into Ireland.
As to the firft, We fhall find the hiftory of firft: expedition of the
Englifh into Ireland, to be briefly thus : In the Reign of King Henry
the Second, Dermoc Fitzmurchard, commonly called Mac-Morrogh,
prince of Leinfter, who was a man cruel and ©ppreflive, after ma¬
ny battles with other princes of Ireland, and being beaten and put to
flight by them, applied for relief to King Henry the Second, who was
then bulled in Aquitaine ; the King was not then in fuch circurn-
ftances as to afford him much help : However thus much he did for
him: By letters patents he granted licenfe to all his fubjefts through¬
out his dominions, to aflift the faid prince to recover his dominions.
Thefe letters patent are to be feen in f Giraldus Cambrenfis, who
was Hiftoriographer and Secretary to King Hen. II. and accompanied
him in his expedition into Ireland, and from him it is that we have
this relation. The Irilh prince brought thefe letters into England,
and caufed them to be read in the audience of many people ; beating
up, as it were, for volunteers aud free adventurers into Ireland. At
length, Richard Earl of Strigul (now Chepftow in Monmouthfhire)
fon of Earl Gilbert, called Strongbow, agreed with him, to afiift him
in the recovery of his country, on condition that Dermot ftiould give
him his eldeft daughter in marriage, and his kingdom of Leinfter af¬
ter his death. About the fame time Robert Fitz-Stephen, Governor
of Aberlefie in Wales, agreed likewife with Dermot to help him, on
condition that he would grant to him and Maurice Fitzgerald in fee
' the city of Wexford, with two cantreds or hundreds of land near
adjoining.
Thefe adventurers afterwards went over, and were fuccefsful in treat¬
ing with the Irilh, and taking Wexford, Waterford, Dublin, and
other Places. Whereupon Earl Richard Strongbow married Dermot’s
daughter, and according to compact, fucceeded him in his kingdom.
Henry II. comes into Ireland.
A little after the defcent of thefe adventurers, King Henry II. Iiim-
felf went into Ireland with an army, in Nov. 1172, and finding that
his fubje<fts of England had made a very good hand of their expedi¬
tion, he obtained from Earl Richard Strongbow a furrender of Dublin,
with the cantreds adjoining, and all the maritime towns and caftles.
But Strongbow and his heirs were to enjoy the refidue of DermoPs
principality.
Irifh fubmit to him.
King Henry II. landed at Waterford from Milford in Pembrokeftiire,
and flaying there fome few days, (fays Giraldus Cambrenfis) Dermod,
King of Corky came to him and freely fucore fealty and fubjettion to the King
ef England,
•f Giraldus Ca?nlr. Hib . ex pug* lib- 1. c. 1, .
( 10 )
^rorii thence he went to Lifmore, and thence to CafheJ, where
Dunaldus, King of Limerick, alfo made his fubmifion to the King. The
like did all the Nobility and Princes in the fouth of Ireland.
Afterwards he marched to Dublin, and there the princes of the
adjacent countries came ro him, and by profefions of loyalty and fib-
jcftion , obtained peace from the King. Thus Cambrenfis in his Hibernia
Expugnata ; and there he mentions the feveral princes that came in,
viz. Mac-^ihaghlin, King of Ophaly, O’Carrol, King of Uriel (now
Lowth) O’Rourk, King of Meath, Rodrick O’Connor, King of
Connaught, and Monarch as it were of the whole ifland, with divers
Others, who by the inof folemn ties of fealty and fuhjeliion bound themfelves
to the King , and, in the fngle per fan of Roderick , King of Connaught , as
being monarch of the whole if and, were all reduced to the fate of fubjefts :
Indeed there were few perfons of rank or confequcnce in the if and, who did
not do homage to his Majefy as their liege Lord.
The fame relation we have from Roger Ho'veden (Anhal. pars poller,
fol. Joi.) About the kalends of November 1172, (faith he) King
Henry II. of England, took {hipping for Ireland at Milford, and
landed at Waterford, and there he was met by the Kings of Cork,
Limerick , Ophaly, Meath, and almof all the great ?nen of Ireland. And
a little afterwards, in the fame place, fpeaking of King Henry the
Second’s being at Waterford, In this place the king of England was met
by ail the Archbifkopsy Bijbops , and Abbots of all Ireland, who received hint
to be King and Lord of Ireland, [wearing allegiance to him and to his heirs,
and that he Jhould have the power of governing than for ever ; and upon
this they gave him their charters. After the example of the Clergy , the
Kings and Chiefs of Ireland, mentioned above, received Henry King of Eng*
laud, in like manner , to be Lord and King of Ireland \ and beca?ne his ful¬
fils, and [wore allegiance to him and his heirs againf all others.
Matthew Paris likewife in his hiftory, fpeaking of King Henry II*
being in Ireland, faith, the Archbijhop and B if oops received him to be Lord
and King , fwore allegiance, and did hhn homage ,
John Brampton, Abbot of Jorna, in his HHlorla Jornalenfi, page.
1070, fpeaking of Henry II. hath thefe words, all the Archbijhops 4
Bifhops, and Abbots of Ireland came to the King of England, and received
him for King and laird of Ireland, J wearing fealty to him and his heirs for
ever. The Kings alfo and princes of Ireland, did in like manner re¬
ceive Henry King of England, for Lord of Ireland, and became his
men, and did homage, and fwore fealty to him and his heirs againlp
all men. And he received letters from them with their feals pendent
in manner of charters, confirming the kingdom of Ireland to hin;
and his heirs ; and teftifying, that they in Ireland had ord&ined him
and his heirs to be their King and Lord of Ireland for ever. After
which, lie returned into England in April following, viz. April 1 173,
Ireland whether ever conquered ,
I come now to enquire into our particular propofed, viz. Whether
Ireland might be properly faid to be conquered by King Henry II. or
by any other Prince in any lucceeding rebellion. And here we are to
underhand by conqueft, an Acquisition of a kingdom by fos.cs.
OF ARMS, TO WHICH, FORCE LIKEWISE HAS BEEN OPPOSED. If WC
we are to underftand conqueft in any other lenfc, 1 Tee not of what
ufe it can be made againft Ireland’s being a free country. I know con -
queftus fignifies a peaceable acquifition, as well as an hoftile i'ubjugat-
ing of an enemy. Vid. Spelman's Glof. And in this fenfe William I.
is called the Conqueror, and many of our Kings have ufed the epo-
cha after the conqueft. And fo likewife Henry II. lliled himfelf Con¬
queror and Lqrd of Ireland : But that his conqueft was no violent
fubjugation of this kingdom, is manifeft from what foregoes : For
here we have an intire and voluntary fubmiflion of all the ecclefiafti-
cal and civil ftates of Ireland, to King Henry II. without the lead
hoftile ftroke on any fide ; we hear not in any of the chronicles of
any violence on either part, all was tranfa&ed with the greateft quiet,
tranquillity, and freedom imaginable. 1 doubt not but the barbarous
people of the iftand at that time wTere ftruck with fear and terror of
King Henry II’s powerful force which he brought with him ; but dill
their eafy and voluntary fubmilftons exempt them from the confequents
of an hoftile conqueft, whatever they are ; where there is no oppo-
fition, fuch a conqueft can take no place. '
I have before taken notice of Henry IPs ufmg the ftile of C:nqus~
ror of Ireland%. 1. prefume no argument can be drawn from hence,
for Iceland’s being a conquered country ; for we find that many of the
Kings of England have ufed the sera of poft Conquejium ; Edward III/
was the firft that ufed it in England, and we frequently meet with
Henry the fourth fmee the conqueft, & c. as taking the Norman inva-
fion of William I. for a conqueft. But I believe the people of Eng¬
land would take it very ill to be thought a conquered nation, in the
ftnfe that feme impofe it on Ireland ; And yet we find the fame reafon
in one cafe as in the other, if the argument from the King’s idle of
Conqueror prevail. Nay, England may be faid much more properly
to be conquered by William I. than Ireland by Henry II. For we all
know with what violence and oppofition from Harold, King William
obtained the kingdom, after a bloody battle nigh ballings. Whereas
Henry II. received not the leafl oppofition in Ireland ; all came in
peaceably, and had large conceftions made them of the like laws and
liberties with the people of England, which they gladly accepted, as
we fhall fee hereafter. But I am fully fatisfied, that neither King Wil¬
liam I. in his acquifition of England, or Henry II. in his acqueft of
Ireland, obtained the leaft title to what fome would give to conquerors.
Though for my own part, were they conquerors in a fenfe never fo
ftridl, I Ihould enlarge their prerogative very little or nothing thereby,
as fha.ll appear more fully in the fequel of this difeourfe.
Another argument for Henry lid’s hoftile conqueft of Ireland is ta¬
ken from the oppofition which the natives of Ireland gave to the
firft adventurers, Fitz-Stephens, Fitz Gerald, and Earl Strongbow, and
the Battles they fought in alibiing Mac-Mcrrogh, Prince of Leinfter,
in the recovery of his principality.
’Tis certain there were fome confii&s between them and the Irifh,
in which the latter were conftantly beaten; but certainly the con-
quefts obtained by thole adventurers, who came over only by the
f Mr. S el den will not allow that ever H. II. ufed this file, Tit. Hon.
Par. 2, c. 5. felt 26.
( >2 )
King’s licenfe and permiflion, and not at all by his particular com¬
mand (as is manifeft from the words of the letters patents of licenfe re~
cited by Giraldus Cambrenfis, Hib. Expug. page 760. Edit. Francof.
1603. Angl. Norm. Hiber. Camd.) can never be called the conqueft: of
Henry II. efpecially confidering that Henry II. himfelf does not ap¬
pear to have any defign of coming into Ireland, or obtaining the do¬
minion thereof, when he gave to his lubjcds of England this licenfe
of aftifting Mac-Morrogh. But I conceive rather the contrary ap¬
pears, by the ftipulations between Mac-Morrogh and the adventur¬
ers, and efpecially between him and Strongbow, who was to fucceed
him in his principality.
. * * '* 1 -• ’ • ' ' . i, . ; . ’ ' ’ T- it •
Supprefpng rebellions , whether a conqitejl ,
From what foregoes, I prefume it appears that Ireland cannot pro¬
perly be faid fo to be conquered by Henry the fecond, as to give the
parliament of England any jurifdidion over us j it will much more
eafily appear, that the Englilh vidories in any l’ucceeding rebellions in
that kingdom, give no pretence to a conqueft : if every luppreflion of
a rebellion may be called a conqueft, I know not what country will be
excepted. The rebellions in England have been frequent : in the con-
tefts between the houfes of York and Lancafter, one fide or other mult
needs be rebellious. I am fure the commotions in King Charles the
firft’s time, are Riled fo by moR hiRorians. This pretence therefore
of conqueR from rebellions, has fo little colour in it, that I fhall not
infift longer on it: I know conqueR is an hateful word to Englifh ears ;
and we have lately feen a book J undergo a ievere cenfure, for offer¬
ing to broach the dodrine of conqueR in the free kingdom of England,
^‘J\ ... -
What title is obtained by conqueft .
But, to take off all pretence from this title by conqueR, I come in
the third place to enquire, what title conquest gives by the
law of Mature and reason.
/ d, ^ . 7 * ‘ ' 7 .
No title gained by an unjuft conqueft P
And in this particular I conceive,- that if the aggreffor or infulter in¬
vades a nation unjuftly, he can never thereby have a right over the
conquered : This I fuppofe will be readily granted by all men : if a vil¬
lain with a piRol at my breaR, makes me convey my cRate to him, no
one will fay that this gives him any right: And yet juR luch a title ast
this has an unjuR conqueror, who with a fword at my throat forces
me into fubmiffion ; that is, forces me to part with my natural eftate,
and birthright, of being governed only by laws to which I give my
confent, and not by his will, or the. will of any other.
What title by a juft conqueft.
Let us then fuppofe a juft invader, one that has right on his fide to
attack a nation in an hoftile manner ; and that thole who oppofe him
are in the wrong: let us then fee what power he gets, and oyer whore-.
X Bifbop of Salijbarfs pajloral letter*
None over the ajfpjlers in the lonqurjt.
Firft, ’tis plain he gets .by his conqueft no power over thofe who
conquered with him ; they that' fought on his fide, whether as private
foldiers or commanders, cannot fuller by the conqueft, but mull at
leaft be as much freemen, as they were before: if any loft their free¬
dom by the Norman conqueft, (fuppofmg King William the Firft had
right to invade England) it was only the Saxons and Britains, and not
the Normans, that conquered with him. In like manner fuppofiiig
Henry II. had a right to invade this ifland, and that he had been op-
pofed therein by the inhabitants, it was only the antient race of . the
Irifti, that could fuffer by this fubjugation : the Englilh and Britains,
that came over and conquered with him, retained all the freedoms and
immunities of free-born fubjedts ; they rior their defendants could not
in reafon lofe thefe, for being fuccefsful and vidtoriouj^; for fo, the
ftate of both conquerors and conquered (hall be equally flavifh. *Novr
>tis manifeft that the great body of the prefent people of Ireland, are
the progeny of the Englilh and Britains, that from time to time have
come over into this kingdom ; and there remains but a mere handful
of the antient Irifti at this day ; I may fay, not One in a thoufand : fo
that if I, or any body clfe," claim the : like freedoms with the natu¬
ral born fubjedts of England, as being defended from them, it will
be impoflible to prove the contrary. 1 conclude therefore, that a juft
conqueror gets no power, but only over thole who have adtually ailift-
ed in that unjuft force that is ufed againll him.
’ . . ’i . i - t , •* * i • r „ d . .» t -i« it . m! 4 n
None over the non-oppofers .
And as thofe that joined with the conqueror in a juft invafion, have
loft no right by the conqueft ; fo neither have thofe of the country
who oppoled him not : This ferns fo reafonable at firft propofal, that
it wants little proof. All that gives title in a juft conqueft, is the op-
pofers ufmg brutal force, and quitting the law of reafon, and ufing
the law of violence ; whereby the conqueror is entitled to ufe him as a
beaft ; that is, kill him, or enftave him. . .
JuJl conqueror inti tied to the lives of the oppofers.
Secondly, Let us confider what power that is, which a rightful con¬
queror has over the fubdued oppofers: And this we {hall find extends
little farther than over the lives of the conquered ; I 'fay, little farther
than over their lives ; for how far it extends to their eftates, and that
it extends not at all to deprive their pofterity of the freedoms and im¬
munities to which all mankind have a right, J ftiall ftiew prefently.
That the juft conqueror has an abfolute power over the lives and liber¬
ties of the conquered, appears from hence ; becaufe they conquered,
by putting themfelves in a ftate of war by ufing an unjuft force, have
thereby forfeited their lives. For quitting reafon, (which is the rule
between man and man) and ufmg force (which is the way of beafts)
they become liable to be deftroyed by him againft whom they ufe
force, as any favage wild beaft that is dangerous to his being.
( '4 )
And this is the cafe of rebels in a fettled commonwealth, who for¬
feit their lives on this account. But as for forfeiting their eftates, it
depends on the municipal laws cf the kingdom. But we are now
enquiring what the cojaiequen.ee will be between two contefting na¬
tions.
Which brings me to confider bow far a juft conqueror has power
over the polterity and eftates of the conquered.
J'ft conqueror how far empowered over the pofterity of the oppofers.
As to the pofterity, they not having joined or affifted in the forci¬
ble oppofition of the conquerors juft arms, can l.ofe no benefit there¬
by. It is unreafonable any man Ihould be punifhed but for his own
fault. Man being a free agent, is only anfwerable for his own deme¬
rits ; and as it would be highly unjuft to hang up the father for the
fons offence, fo the converfe is equally unjuft, that the fon fhouldfuf-
fer any inconvenience for the father’s crime. A father hath not in
himfelt a power over the life or liberty of his child, fp that no a<ft of
his can poflibly forfeit it. And though we find in the municipal law*
of particular kingdoms, that the fon lqfes the father’s eftate for the
rebellion or other demerit of the father, yet this is contented and
agreed to, for the public fafety, and for deterring the fubje&s fronv
certain enormous crimes that would be highly prejudicial to the com¬
monwealth. And to luch conftitutions the fubjeds are bound to fubr
mit, having contented to them, tho’ it may be unreafonable to put the
like in execution between nation and nation in the ftate of nature :
For in fettled governments, property in eftates is regulated, bounded
and determined by the laws of the commonwealth, contented to by
the people, fo that in thefe, ’tis no injuftice for the fon to Jofe his pa*
trimony for his father’s rebellion or other demerit.
How far over their eftates ,
If therefore, the pofterity of the conquered are not to fuffer for the
tmjuft oppofition given to the victor by their anceftors, we fhall find lit-»
tie place for any power of the conquerors over the eftates of the fub-
dued. The father by his milcarriages and violence can forfeit but his
own life, he involves not his children in his guilt or deftru&ion, His
goods, which nature (that willeth the prefervation of all mankind as
far as poflible) hath made to belong to his children to fuftain them, do
ftill continue to belong to his children. ’Tis true indeed, it ufually
happens that damage attends unjuft force ; and as far as the repair of
this damage requires it, fo far the rightful conqueror may invade the
goods and eftate of the conquered ; but when this damage is made up,
his title to the goods ceafes, and the refidue belongs to the wife and
children of the fubdued.
It may feem a ftrange do&rine, that any one fhould have a power
over the life of another man, and not over his eftate ; but this we
find every day, for tho’ l may kill a thief that fets on me in the high
way, yet I may not take away his money ; for it is the brutal force
the aggreflor has ufed, that gives his adversary a right to take away
his life, as a noxious creature. But ic is only damage fuftained, that
gives title to another man’s goods.
( *5 )
Practice of conquerors other wife.
It mud be confefted, that the practice of the world is otherwlfe, and
vet commonly fee the conqueror (whether juft or unjuft) by the force he
has over the conquered, compels them with a fword at their breaft to
hoop to his conditions, and fubmit to fuch a government as he pleafes
to afford them. But we enquire not now, what is the practice, but
what right there is to do fo. If it be faid the conquered fubmit by
their Qwn confent t Then this allows confent neceffary to give the
conqueror a title to rule over them. But then we may enquire whether
promiies extorted by force without right, can be thought confent, and
how far they are obligatory ; and I humbly conceive they bind not at
all. He that forces my horfe from me, ought prefently to reftore him,
and I have ftill a right to retake him : So he that has forced a pro-
mile from me, ought prefently to reftore it, that is, quit me of the
obligation of it, or I may chufe whether I will perform it or not : For
the law of nature obliges us only by the rules Ihe prefcribes, and
therefore caqnot oblige me by the violation of her rules ; fuch is the
extorting any thing from me by force.
From what has been faid, I prefume it pretty clearly appears, that
an unjuft conqueft gives no title at all ; that a juft conqueft gives
power only over the lives and liberties of the adtual oppofers, but not
over their pofterity or eftates, othery/ife than as before is mentioned ;
and not at all over thofe that did not concur in the oppofttion.
They that defire a more full difquifition of this matter, may find it
at large in an incomparable treatife concerning the True Original,
Extent, and End of Civjl Government, Chap. 16. This dif-
courfe is faid to be written by my excellent friend, John Locke, Efq;
whether it be fo pr not, I know not ; this I am fure, whoever is the
author, thegreateft genius in Chriftendom need not difown it.
But granting that all we have faid in this matter is wrong, and
granting that a conqueror, whether juft or unjuft, obtains an abfolute
arbitrary dominion over the perfons, eftates, lives, liberties and for¬
tunes of all thofe whom he finds in the nation, their wives, pofterity,
&c. fo as to make perpetual flaves of them and their generations ta
come. '
CqnceJJims granted by a conqueror, whether obligatory.
Let us next enquire whether conceftions granted by fuch a victorious
hero, do not bound the exhorbitancy of his power, and whether he
be not obliged ftri&ly to obferve thefe grants.
And here I believe no man of common lenfe or juftice, will deny it ;
none that has ever confidered the law of nature and nations, can pof-
fibly hefitate on this matter ; the very propofmg it, ftrikes the
fenfe and common notions of all men fo forcibly, that it needs no far¬
ther proof. I fhall therefore inlift no longer on it, but haften to con-
fider how far this is the cafe of Ireland ; And that brings me naturally
to the fourth particular propofed, viz. To fhew by precedents, records,
and liiftory, what concellions and grants have been made from time
to time to the people of Ireland, and by what fteps the laws of Eng¬
land came to be introduced into this kingdom*
( «6 )
What concejjions have been made from the crovjn of England to the king¬
dom <3/ Ireland, by Henry II.
We are told by Matth. Paris, Hiftoriographer to Henry III. that
Henry II.' a little before he left Ireland, in a public altembly and
council of the Irilh at Lifmore, did caufe the Irifli to receive, and
fwear to be governedby the laws of England : * King Henry , (faith he)
before be left .'Ireland, called an ajjemhly at Lifmore , where the laws of
England were cheerfully received by all , and confirmed with the fo-
lemnity of an oath. ,
And not only thus, but if we may give credit to Sir Edward Coke,
in the 4th Initit. cap. 1. and 76, and to the infcription to the Irilh
Modus Tenendi Parliamentary , it will clearly appear, that Henry II. did
not only fettle the Laws of England, in Ireland, and the jurifdiCtion
ecclefiaftical there, by the voluntary acceptance and allowance of the
nobility and clergy, but did likewife allow them the freedom of holding
of parliaments in Ireland, as a feparate and diftin$ kingdom from Eng¬
land ; and did then fend them a Modu y to direct them how to hold their
parliaments there. The title of which modus runs thus ;
Henry King of England , Conqueror and Lord of Ireland , tAc. fends
this form of holding parliaments to the Archbifbops , Bijhops , Abbots ,
Priors , Earls , Ba vns, JuJlices, V if counts. Mayors , Senefchalj , Magif-
trates , and all his loyal [ubjefits of Ireland.
Imprimis , the calling of parliament ought to be forty days before .
And fo forth.
This Modus is faid to have been fent into Ireland by Henry II for
a direction to hold their parliaments there. And the lenfe of it agrees
for the molt part with the Modus Tenendi Parliam. in England, faid to
have been allowed by William the Conqueror, when he obtained that
kingdom ; where tis altered, ’tis only to fit it the better for the king¬
dom of Ireland.
I know very well the antiquity of this Modus, fo faid to be tranf-
mitted for Ireland by Henry II. is queftioned by fome learned anti*
quaries, particularly by Mr. Seldenf and f Mr. Pryn, who deny alfo
the Engliih Modus as well as this.' But on the other hand, my Lord.
Chief Juftice Coke, in the 4th Inflit, page 12 and 349, does ftrenuouf-
)y affert them both. And the late Revd. and learned Dr. Dopping,
Bilhop of Meath, has publilhed the Irilh Modus, with a vindication o,f
its antiquity and authority in the preface.
There feems to me but two objections of any moment raifed by Mr.
Pryn againft thefe Modi. The one relates both to the Englifh and
Jrifli Modus ; the other chiefly (trikes at the Irifh. He fays, the name
parliament, fo often found in thele Modi, was not. a name for the
great council of England known fo early as thefe Modi pretend to.
* Vid. Matth. Paris , ad An. 1172. Vit. H. 2.
t Tit. Hon. Par. 2. c. 5. feA. 2 6. Edit, Land. An. 1671,
t Againft Coke's 4 th Inflit . c . 76. _ .
( >7 )
I confefs I am not prepared to difprove this antiquary in this parti¬
cular • but to me it feems reafonable enough to imagine that the name
parliament, came in with William the Conqueror: ’Tis a word per¬
fectly French, and I fee noreafon to doubt its coming in with the Nor¬
mans. The other objection affects our Irifh Modus, for he tells us,
that Sheriffs were not eftabliflied in Ireland in Henry II’s times, when
this Modus was pretended to be fent hither, yet w*e find the word Vice-
comes therein. To this I can only anfwer, that Henry II. intending*
to eftabliih in Ireland the Englifh form of government, as the firft, and
chief ftep thereto, he fent them directions for holding of parliaments,
deligning afterwards by degrees and in due time to fettle the other
conititutions, agreeable to the model of England. If therefore,
England had then Sheriffs, we need not wonder to find them named in
the Irifh Modus, tho’ they were not as yet eftabliflied among 11 us, for
they were defigned to be appointed foon after, and before the Modus
could be put regularly in execution ; and accordingly we find them
eftabliflied in fome counties of Ireland in King John’s time.
This Irifh Modus is faid to have been in the cuftody of Sir Chrifto-
pher Prefton of Clane, in Ireland, Ann. 6 Hen. IV. and by Sir John
Talbot, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, underlying Henry IV. It was
exemplified by Infpeximus under the great leal of Ireland, and the ex¬
emplification was fometime in the hands of Mr. Hackwel of Lincoln* s.-
Inn, and by him was communicated to Mr. Selden. The tenor of
which exemplification runs thus :
Henry , by the grace of God% King of England and France , and Lord of
Ireland , to all to whom theje prefents (hall come, greeting. IVe have ex¬
amined the tenor of fever al articles , ( written in a parchment-roll found
in the cujlody of Chriflopher Prejlon , Efq j at the time of his being lately
arrejled in the town of Clare by ike Deputy of our trujiy and beloved John C
V albot of HalomJbirey Knight , the Lieutenant of our lately acquired terri¬
tory of Ireland , in our own prefence , and before our council in the faid
territory , at the town ef Trim , on the ninth day of January laj} pa/l) in
thefe words :
1‘ The method of holding parliaments . Henry King of England , con -
“ queror and Lord of Ireland , fends this form to the Archbifhops , iAc.n as
before in p. 1 6.
Then follows the Modus, agreeable in moft things with that of
England, only fitted to Ireland. Then the exemplification concludes :
Now we have thought proper by the tenor of thefe prefents to caufe an
ex emplif cation to he made of the tenors of the aforejaid articles , by and
with the confent of our above-named Lieutenant , and of our council
named above , and have ordered thefe our letters patent to be made. IVit-
nejs our aforefaid Lieutenant at Trim , on the nth of January , in the
fixth year of our reign. By the Lieutenant and Council.
Now we can hardly think it credible, (fays the Bilhcp of Meath)
that an exemplification could have been madefo folemnly of it by King
Henry IV. and that it fhould refer to a Modus tranlmitted into Ireland
by King Henry II- and affirm that it was produced before the Lord
Lieutenant and Council at Trim, if no fuch thing had been done:
'This were to call in queflion the truth of all former records andtran-
LClions, and make the exemplification contain an egregious falihood
in the body of it.
4
u
( «8 )
The Revd. Bifhop of Meath, in his fore-cited preface, does believe
that he had obtained the very original record, faid by my Lord Coke
to have been in the hands of Sir Chriftopher Prefton : It came to that
learned prelate’s hands amongft other 'papers and manufcripts of Sir
William Domville’s, late Attorney-General in this kingdom, who in
his life-time, upon an occafional difcourfe with the Bilhop concerning
it, told him, that this record was bellowed on him (Sir William Dom-
ville) by Sir James Cuffe, late Deputy Vice-Treafurer of Ireland ;
that Sir James found it among the papers of Sir Francis Aungier,
Mader of the Rolls in this kingdom ; and the prefent Earl of Long¬
ford (grandfon to the faid Sir Francis Aungier) told the Bifhop, that
his faid grandfather had it out of the treafury of Waterford.
Whild 1 write this, I have this very record now before me, from the
hands of the faid Bilhop of Meath’s fon, my nephew, Samuel Dop-
ping ; and I mull confefs it has a venerable antient appearance, but
whether it be the true original record, I leave on the arguments pro¬
duced for its credit by the faid Bifhop.
Parliament s very early in Ireland.
This I am fure of, that whether this be the very record tranfmitted
hither by King Henry II. or not; yet ’fis mod certain from the una¬
nimous conceiiions of all the fore-mentioned antiquaries, Coke, Selden,
Pryn, &c. that we have had parliaments in Ireland veryfoon after the
invafion of Henry II. For Pryn confelfes that * King Henry II. after
his conquell of Ireland, and the general voluntary fubmiflion, ho¬
mages, ana fealties of mod of the Irifh Kings, Prelates, Nobles, Ci¬
ties and People, to him, as to their Sovereign Lord and King, Anno
1 170, [it Ihould be 1 1 72] held therein a general council of the Clergy
at Cafhel, wherein he rectified many abufes in the Church, and edab-
lilhed fundry ecclefiadical laws, agreeable to thole in the Church of
England : Labouring by all means to reduce the Jlate of that Church to
the form of the Englift ; to which the Irilh clergy-promifed conformity,
and to obferve them for time to come, as J Giraldus Cambrenfis, who
was then in Ireland, and other f Hidorians, relate : And that in every
particular thefatne obfervances might unite both kingdoms^ that is England
and Ireland,) they all every vohere, with perfect unanimity by common
confent , and with etjual chearfulnefs , fubmit to the King s phafure ; every
thing , therefore , being, fettled in this manner , in an ajjembly held at LiJ -
more, the laws of England were cheerfully accepted by all , and eflab lift¬
ed with the folemnity of an oath , fays Mat. Paris.
Original Compafi for Ireland.
Can any conceffion in the world be more plain and free than this ?
We have heard of late much talk in England of an original compact
between the King and people of England ; I am fure ’tis not polfible
* Againf the 4 th Inf. c. 76. p. 249.
t ‘Topograph. Ilibern . /. 3. c. 18. Hib. Expug. 1. 11. c. 33, 34.
•J Hoveden Annal. pars Port. p. 302. Brampton Chr. Col. 107 1. Knigh¬
ton de Even. Angl. c. c. io. col. 2394, 2395. Pol. Virg. Hijl. Angl. /. 13.
. . . ( '9 )
to Ihew a more fair original compact between a King and people, than
this between Henry II. and the people of Ireland, That they should
-ENJOY THE LIKE LIBERTIES AND IMMUNITIES, ANDBH GOVERNED BY
The SAME MILD LAWS, BOTH CIVIL AND ECCLESIASTICAL, AS THE
people of England.
From all which, it is manifeh, that there were no laws impofed on
the people of Ireland, by any authority of the parliament of England ;
nor any laws introduced into that kingdom by Henry II. but by the
confent and allowance of the people of Ireland : For both the civil and
ecckfiadical date were fettled there, Regime fublimttatis. authoritale ,
folely by the King’s authority, and their own good wills,, as the Irilh
flatute, i i..Eliz. c. i . exprefles ;it. ; And not pnly the laws of pngland,
biit the manner oflioldihg parliaments in.Irda|nd to make laws of their
own (which is the foundation and bulwark of the people’s liberties and
properties) was directed and eftablifhed there by Henry II. as if he
.were refolved that no other perfon or .perfons Ihould be the founders
of the. government of Ireland, but himfelf and the confent of the
people, who Submitted themfclves, to him againh ,all perfons what¬
soever. r , I
Let us now fee by what farther degrees, the government of; Ireland
.grew up conformable to that of England. . Aut-T
King John made 'King c/'Trekncli ,
About the twenty-third year of. Henr)’- II. (whic}i > V/as within, five
years 'after, his return from Irel.apd) he created his younger fop John,
'King of Irejand, pt- a parIia,meAit:. heiTat Oxford. r,,.\oon .after King
John being then about, twelve ..ye^s -pf. age, ;came0 intpjrelan.d, from
Milford . tp,'. .Water ford, Aas his/at'her'hni fprjnerly .done.. . The Irilh
Nobility and'Geiitry i,mtned;atet^.,4;epairG.d to him; but being," re¬
ceived by hinri und his retinue wfthbbme fcorn and derifion, .by reafon
of their Ipftg. rude Beards, which, t, bey wore (Ays Giraldus, Cambrenfis,
Hib,. Expugi Gap.. ^5.) of great length: and fize* af{er the manner of
their country, they, took fuch. offence thereat, that theydepartfd in much
difc.onten.t ; irw^i.cji was()the occafibn „of . the ^young.KingA 'flaying fo
Ihort a time in IrgAfftb as he did. this his firft;time of being. here.
By this Ireland made :an abfolute feparate Kingdom.1
And here, before We proceed’ any farther, we fhall obferve, that by
this, donation of the. kingdom. ;Qf Ireland to King; John, Ireland was
mod eminently fet apart ag.airft as. a; feparate and didimd kingdom by
Itfelf from .the kingdom of England 5, and did fo continue, until the
kingdom of England defcended and came Unto King John, after the
death of his brother Richard I. King .of England, which was about
twenty-two years after his being made King of Ireland ; during
which fpace pf tweijty-two years, both whild his father Henry II. and
liis brother Richard, h, were living and reigning; King J,ohh made di¬
vers grants and charter? to his fubje<5ts of Ireland, which are yet in be¬
ing in this kingdom ; wherein he biles himfelf Lord of Ireland , (the
condanjt bile till Henry V Ill's time;) and in others, Lord of Ireland ,
and Earl of Meritonia. By which charters both the city of Dublin,
and divers other corporations enjoy many privileges and franchifes to
/ 20 * )
to rfehis. day. But after the laid grant of the kingdom of Ireland to
King John, neither his father Henry II. nor his brother Richard
I. Kings of England, ever (tiled themfelves*, during their lives,
King or Lord of Ireland ; for the * dominion and regality of Ire¬
land was wholly and feparately veiled in King John, being abfo-
lutely granted unto him without any refervatioii. And he being
created King in the parliament at Oxford, under the (tile and title ot
Lord of Ireland, enjoyed all manner of kingly jurifdi&ion, prehemi-
nence, and authority royal, belonging unto the imperial date and ma-
jefty of a King, as are the exprefs words of the Irrfh Statute, 33
Henry VIII. c. t. by which Statute the (tile of Lord was changed to
that of King of Ireland.
Let us then fuppofe that Richard T. King John’s elder brother, had
not died without idue, but that his progeny had fat on the throne of
England, in a continued fuccedion to this day : Let us fuppofe like-
wife the fame of King John’s progeny, in relation to the throne of
Ireland ; where then had been the fubordination of Ireland to the par¬
liament, or even tb the King of England ? Certainly no fuch thing
could have been then pretended : Therefore if any fuch fubordination
there be, it rnuft arife from fomething that followed after the defeent
of England to King John ; for by that defeent England might as
properly be fubordinate to Ireland, as the converfe ; Ireland being
veiled in the royahperfon of King John, two and twenty years before
his acceflion to the. crown of England, and being a more ancient king¬
dom than the kingdom -of EhglancL As the Englifh orators in the
council of Cohlthhce, ,A:ir 1417 * confeded and alleged, as an argu¬
ment in- the bonteil between ■Hfen-ry-”' Vth’s- Legates, and thofe of
Charles VL* King1 of Fiance, for precedence, It is perfectly, clear (lay
they) f according to 'Albert lie Greats and Bartholomew , concerning the
rights of fates , tbat\ the while World being divided into three 'parts , Eu¬
rope, Af a, and Africa, (for America wa’s not then difeovered) : Europe is
divided into four kingdoms , thofe of Rome, ' Confantinople, Ireland, (now
transferred to the ‘EngRJb ) and Spain. Hence it follows * that the Kmg of
England, dflddns 'Kingdont, ate aMtoigfl the vtof difingnifjed Arid arkieltt
Kings and kingdoms of all Europe. The antiquity and precedence of
the King of England, was allowed him wholly on thfc* account of his
kingdom of Ireland. v,< - \ . .t. '> -
Ireland in what fenfe annexed to England.
Perhaps it will be fat d, that this fubordination of the kingdom of
Ireland, to the kingdom of England, proceeds from Ireland’s being
annexe^ to, and as It were united with the imperial crown of England,
by fev^ral a6ts of parliament both in Englantfand Ireland, fince king
John’s time. But how far this operates, 1 (hall enquire more fully
hereafter ; I (hall only at prefent obferve, that I conceive little more
is effected by thefe flatutes, than that Ireland fhall npt be aliened or
feparated from the king of England, who cannot hereby difpofe of
it otherwife than in legal fuccedion along with England ; and that
* S Aden's fit. Hon. Par. 1. C. 8. Sell. 5. Ufoer, Archbijhop of Ar¬
magh, of the religion of the ancient Irifh, Cap. ii.
f AR. Co mil* Cinfant. Sef 28. MS, in Bib, Reg. not. in the printed Alls.
( 21 )
whoever is king of England, is ipfo fa do King of Ireland, and the fub.
jecfcs of Ireland are obliged to obey him as their liege lord.
King John comes afecond time into Ireland. The people Jubmit to him ,
To proceed therefore. After both crowns were united, on the
death of Richard I. without ilTue, in the royal perfon of king
John : He, about the twelfth year of his reign of England, went
again into Ireland, viz. the twenty-eighth day of June, 1210; and
Matth. Paris tells us, page 220, After his arrival at the city of Dublin ,
there met him more than twenty petty Princes of that country , who ftruck
‘with' the greateft fear, did him homage, and fivore allegiance. There alfo the
King caufed them to.efablif '? the laws and cuftoms of England , appointing
l rifcoiints, and other MagiJl rates , to govern the people of that kingdom ac¬
cording to the Englifb laws. x ;
Cone efpons from Henry III.
His fon King Henry III. came to the crown the 19th of 0<5Iober,
1216, apd in November following he granted to Ireland a Magna
Charta, dated at Briftol 1 2th November, the firft year of his reign.
’Tis prefaced, that for the honour of God, and advancement
of Holy Church, by the advice of his council of England,
(whofe names are particularly recited) he makes the following grant to
Ireland ; and then goes qn exa&ly agreeable to the Magna Charta
which he granted to England ; only in ours we have Civitas Dublin.
<b Avenliffee , inhead of Civitas London , 6' Thamefis , with other al¬
terations of the like kind where needful. But ours is eight years older
than that which he granted to England, it pot being till the ninth
year of his reign, and ours is the firft year. This Magna Charta of
Ireland concludes thus ; — Becaufe we have not hitherto had a feal, we-
have caufed the prefe?it Charter to be foaled with the feali of our venerable
fat hep, of Lord Walter, Legate of the Apofolic See, and of William
jyLarefchall , Earl of Pembroke, our Governor , and Governor of our King-
dom. Witnefs all who are mentioned above, and many others * Given under
the hand of the afore faid Lord Legate, and William Marefchall, at Briftol,
oil the 1 2th day of November and firft year of \our reign. An ancient copy
of this Magna Charta of Ireland is to be fqund in the Red Book of
Exchequer, Dublin.
In February following, in the firft year likevvife of his reign, by-
advice of all his faithful counfellors in England, to gratify the Irifh.
(fays X Pryn) for their eminent loyalty to his father and him, he grant¬
ed them out of his fpecial Grace, that they and their heirs for ever
fhould enjoy the liberties granted by his father and himfelf to the
realm of England ; which he reduced into writing, and fent fealed
thither under the feal of the Pope’s Legate, and W. Earl Marfhall, his
Governor, becaufe he had then no feal of his, own. This, as 1 con¬
ceive, refers to the forementioned Magna Charta Hibernse. The re¬
cord as recited by Mr. Pryn, here follows:
§ The King to the Archbifbcps, Bifhops , Abbots, Earls, Barons , Eftquires 9
and Freeholders, and all our faithful fubjefts fettled in Ireland , greeting*
X Pryn agatnft the efth hfi. c • 76, p. 250.
§ Pa. 1 Henry III. ni. 13. bit us.'
(, 22 )
Commending your loyalty to the King our father in the Lord, and that which
we know,- you will always few to vs ; our will and- pleafure is, that of
our yrrace and favour to dur kingdom of Ireland , you and your heirs for ever
fould enjoy in tejlimpny of your unf oaken and difthigui fed loyalty, the liber¬
ties granted to our kingdom of England by our father and Surf elf. Which
liberties reduced to writing, with the common confent of our faithful fuhjefls,
we fend to you fealed with the feals of our Lord Walter , Legate of the Kpof-
tclic Sec, and of our trufly Earl, William Marefchall, our Governor , and
that- of four ' kingdom , bectiufe me have as yet no feal ; determined in procefs
of time , with farther advice , to ratify the fame liberties with our own feaL
Given at Gloucefer, the '6 th of Feb.
•Here We have a free grant' of all the liberties of England to the peo¬
ple oi Ireland, ^iit we know the liberties of Eriglifhmen are founded
.on that universal law of iiatur£, that ought to prevail throughout the
whole world, “ of being governed only by fuch laws to which they
“ give their own confent by their reprefentatiyes in parliament.”
Record out of Mr. Petyt of the antiquity of Parliaments in. Ireland. ’
And here, before I proceed farther, I fhall tab? notice, that in the
late raifed controverfy, Whether the Houfe of Commons were an ef-
ieiitiai part 6f Parliament,’ before the 49th year of Henry III.’ the
learned Mr. Petyt, Keeper of the Records in the Tower, in his book
on that fubied, page 71, deduces his 9th argument from the compa-
rifon of the ancient Generale Concilium, or Parliament of Ireland,
inftanced An. 38 Henry III. With the Parliament in England, wherein
the Citizens and Burgeffes were ; wrhicli was eleven years before the
pretended beginning of the Commons in England.
\ For thus we find it ljf that Author. ’ u'
As great a' right and privilege furely was and ought to be al-
c* lowed to the Engl: Hi fubjetts, as to the Irifh, before the 49th of
“ Henry in. And if that be admitted, and that their (the Irifh)
Commune Concilium, or Parliament, had its platform from ours
t<: (the Englifh) as I think will not be denied by any that have confidered
u the hiffory and records touching that land (Ireland), we fhall find
“ the enduing records, Ann. 38 Henry Ilf. clearly evince that the
4< Citizens and Burgeifes were then a part of their (the Irifh) Great
“ Council or Parliament. : ■
" That
“ left regent
Ret. 38 Henry III. in 4 Hibernia:.
at King being in partibus Tranfmarinis, and the Queen being
-gent, hie fends writs (or a letter) in the King*s name, dire&ed
<l yftrufalem \ in England, into Ireland , together with J Fitz-Geojfery, the
"* King’s Juf ice, to give you to know the fate tf his land of Vafcohy, enddn-
gered by the hofile invajion of the King of Caftile , who regard left of
li every law but that of force, attempts In violence to wref from us, and
“ from the f overt ignty of the kingdom cf England, our territory of Vafcony.
And therefore entreating ail of you with the great eft earnefnefs and afec -
“ lion to fupport us and our jujl rights, which at prefent are entirely defence -
‘‘ If, With men and money to the utrncf cf your power , not for faking us in
( *3 )
^ Jo great a danger, Which would turn to their everlajling honour ; conclud-
41 ing, that we and our heirs may have the jufiefi obligations to you and your
“ heirs y Jhould you thus fyrnpathize with us in thefe our [iraits. IV itnefs the
41 Queen, and R. Earl of Cornwall, at JVindfor , ljthof Feb.” Thus far
Mr. Petyt.
Here we have a letter from the Queen Regent to the parliament in
Ireland, in an humble manner befeeching them for an aid of men and
money againft the king of C^ifile’s hoftile invafion of Gaicony ; from
whence we may perceive that in thofe days, no more than at prefent,
men and money could not be raifed but by confent of parliament. I
have been the more particular in tranfcribing this paffage out of Mr.
Petyt, to Ihew that we have as ancient and exprefs an authority for
our prefent conftitution of parliaments in Ireland, as can be fhewit
in England. And I believe it will not be thought advifeable in thefe
latter days, to break in upon old fettled conftitutions: no one knows
how fatal the confequents of that may be.
Farther Conceffions from Henry III.
To return, therefore, where we digreffed. Henry III. about the
twelfth year of his reign, did fpecially impower Richard de Burgh,
then juftice of Ireland, at a certain day and place, to fummon all the
Archbifhops, Bifliops, Abbots, Priors, Earls, Barons, Knights, Free¬
holders, and Sheriffs of each county, and before them to caufe to be
read the charter of his father King John, whereunto his feai was ap¬
pendant, whereby he had granted unto them the laws and cuftoms of
England, and unto which they fwore obedience : And that he fhould
caufe the fame laws to be obierved and proclaimed in the feveral coun¬
ties of Ireland, that fo none prefume to do contrary to the King’s
command. The record I have taken out of Mr. Pryn *, in thefe
words :
*f The King to his trufiy and beloved Richard Deburg , his Jufiice of Ire¬
land, greeting. We command and firiftly charge you, that at a certain
thne and place , you caufe to appear before you the Archbifhops, Bi/hops , Ab¬
bots, Friers , Earls , Barons, Efquires, Freeholders and Bailiffs of every
county ; and caufe to be read before them the Charter of Lord John our fa¬
ther, to which his feal is annexed , and which he caufed to be made and fworn
to by the great men of Ireland , concerning the obferving of the Englifh laws
GJid cufioms in Ireland . And command them on our behalf, that for the fu¬
ture they fir Ally hold and follow thofe laws and cufioms, which are contained
in the a fore fail Charter . And caufe the fame to be proclaimed and obferve#
in every county in Ireland. W itnefs ourfelf at Wefiminfier, the 8 tf of May,
and nth year of our reign. ’• ''
•By what foregoes, I prefume it plainly appears, that by three feve¬
ral eftabliihmcnts under the three firft Kings of Ireland of the Nor¬
man race, ** The laws* and liberties of the people of England were
granted to the people of Ireland.” And that neither of thefe three
Kings eftablifhed thofe laws in Ireland by any power^of the parlia¬
ment of England, but by. the free confent, allowance and acceptance
of the people of Ireland.
* Againfi Coke s \th Infiit. p. 252.
*f Clauf. 12. Hen. III. in 8 de legibiis fa confuctudinibus olfervatidis in
Hibern.
t 24 )
Recapitulation.
Henry II. firft introduced the laws of England into Ireland, in a
public affembly of the Irifh at Lifmore, and allowed them the freedom
of parliaments to beheld in Ireland, as they were held in England.
King John, at the requcft, and by the confent of the Irifh, did ap¬
point the Jaws of England to be of force in Ireland ; and though he
did not this till the twelfth year of his reign of England, yet he did
it not as King of England, but as Lord of Ireland : For the crown of
England came to him by defcent from his brother Richard, who had
no regal power in Ireland ; and what his brother had not, could not
defccnd to him.
Henry III. in the firft year of his reign gave Ireland a Magna
Charta; and in the twelfth year of his reign did provide, that all the
laws of England Ihould be obferved in Ireland ; and that the charter
granted to the Irifh by his father King John under his feal, when he
was in that kingdom, Ihould be kept inviolably.
And from the days of thefe three Kings have England and Ireland
been both governed by the like forms of government under one and
the fame fupreme head, the King of England ; yet fo, as both king¬
doms remained feparate and diftindt in their feveral jurifdiftions under
that one head, as are the kingdoms of England and Scotland at this
day, without any fubordination of the one to the other f .
It were endlefs to mention all the records and precedents that might
be quoted for the eftablifliment of the laws of England in Ireland; I
Ihall therefore enter no farther into that matter, but therein refer to
Lord Chief Juftice Coke, § Pryn, X Reyly, * &c.
Englifh laws ejiablifued in Ireland ; particularly the law of Parliament.
If now we enquire, What were thofe laws of England that became
thus eftablifhed in Ireland? Surely we mull firft: reckon the great law
of parliaments, which England fojuftly challenges, and all mankind
have a right to. By the law of parliament, I mean that law whereby
all laws receive their fan&ion, The free debates and confent of the
people, by themfelves, or their chofen reprefentatives. That this was
a main branch of the Englifh law eftablifhed in this kingdom, and the
very foundation of our future legiflature, appears manifeft from par¬
liaments being fo early convoked in Ireland, as the forementioned pre¬
cedents exprel’s.
Mr. Pi;yn acknowledges one in Henry lid’s time, (page 259. againft,
the 4th In ft ) but makes a very falfe conclufion, that there appear no
footfteps of a parliament afterwards, till the third year of Edward II.
becauie the acts of that parliament are the firft that are printed in our
Irifh Stalute-bpok : For fo we may argaie the parliaments of England
to be of later date than pretended, when we find the firft printed a<fts
in Kcebleto be no older than the 9th of Henry 111. whereas ’tis mod
certain, that parliaments have been held in England fome ages before
that.
■\ Phis Work was pubUfljcd before the Union between England an&S cot-
land. § Fourth Inf. t Againf the ±th Inf. * Placita
Parliament aria. . 6
Common Law,,
After this great law of parliaments, we may reckon the common-
law of England, whether it relates to regulating and fettling of pro¬
perty, and eftates in goods or land, or to the judiciary and executive*
parts of the law', and the minifters and procefs thereof, or to criminal
cafes. Thefe lurely were all eftablifhed in this country by the three
firft Kings of Ireland of the Norman race.
Statute Law,
Let us now confider the Hate of the Statute Laws of England un¬
der thefe three. Kings, and their predeceftors : For by the Irifh vo¬
luntary fubmiftion to, and acceptance of the laws and government of
England, we mull; repute them to have fubmitted themfelves to thefe
likewife ; till a regular Jegiflature was eftablifhed amongft them, in
purfuance of that fubmifllon and voluntary acceptance.
Statute Law of England from //-^Norman Conquejl to Henry III.
And here we fhajl find, that in thofe times, viz. from the Norman
conqueft to Henry 1 1 Id’s time inclufive, the Statute-Laws of England
were very few and flender. ’Tis true, that before the 12th of Henry
III. we find amongft the Englifh Hiftorians frequent mention of the
laws of Edward the Confeftbr, William the Conqueror, Henry I.
Hen. II. King John, and Henry III. All which are only charters, or
feveral grants of liberties from the King : which neverthelefs had the
force of acts of parliament, and laid as great obligations both upon
prince and people, as a£ts of parliament do at this day : Whereof we
may read feveral proofs in the Princes Cale, Coke’s 8th Report. . But
tliefe were only fo many confirmations of each other, and all of them
functions of the common laws and liberties of the people of England,
long ufed and approved of through the whole land , and in the enjoyment of
which they and their anceftors had been born and educated , as the words cf
the mamifeript Chronicle of Litchfield exprefs it.
Law of Edward the Gonfejfor .
The Laws of Edward the Confeftor, held in fo great veneration in
ancient times, and ratified and confirmed through the whole kingdom , had
been formerly dij covered and eftablijhed in the reign of h}s grandfather. King
Edgar. Neverthelefs from death of that very King Edgar, until tine corona¬
tion of the. holy King Edward , which was 67 years, the aforefaid laws
were buried and entirely difufed. But after King Edward was raifed to the
throne of the realm, by the advice of the Barons of England, he revived
that law which had been buried, and after its revival , he improved, adorned
and confirmed it : and thus confirmed, it was called the law of King Ed-
yoard the holy ; not hecaufe he was the inventor of it, hut hecaufe he im¬
proved and reftored it%> as the faid Litchfield Chronicle has it. Thefe
laws of Edward the Confcffor were tranferibed by Ingulphus Abbot
of Croyland, under William the Conqueror, and are annexed to his
Hiftory, * •
X Se idea Not.? & fpcclleg. ad eadm. page 171.
{ 2S )
Of William the Conqueror.
The laws of William the Conqueror are but a confirmation of the
laws of Edward the Confefior, with fome fmall alterations, as the very
letter of thofe laws themfelves exprefs it. * This likewife we command. K
that all hold and ohferve the La-tvs of King Edward in all things , with
thofe additions which we have eftahlifed for the benefit of the Englijh.
Of Henry I.
The laws of Henry I. which are in the Red Book of the Exchequer,
in the cuftody of the King’s Remembrancer in England, are but a
fummary confirmation both of the laws of Edward the Confeffor and
William I. as the Charter itfelf exprefies it, § I ref tore you the latv of
King Edward along with thofe amendments which it received from my father
by the advice of the Barons .
Of Henry II. v
The laws of Henry II. called Conftitutioncs Clarendoniae, and the
Affrze of Clarendon in the 2d part of Coke’s Inft. p. 6, are all but
confirmations and vindications of the King’s juft prerogative againft
the ufurpations of the Pope and Clergy : As we find at large in Chron.
Gervafii. Doroborn. p. 1387. Edit. Lond. an. 1652.
Of King John.
The laws of King John, called the Great Charter of King John,
granted in the 17th year of his reign, upon the agreement made be¬
tween him and his Barons at Running-Mead, between Staines and
Windfor, was but a confirmation of the laws of Edward the Confeffor
and Henry I. as Mat. Paris relates it. In the \ qtb year of King Johnf
the grandees came to the King, and requefted that certain laws and liberties of
King Edward , together with other liberties granted to them and to the king¬
dom and church of England , fioould be confirmed, as they are contained in
writing in the Charter of King Henry I. f The fame Hiftorian gives us
alfo at large both Charter of Liberties , and Charter of the Fore ft, which
are not extant in the rolls of thofe times, nor to be found in any till
the 28th of Edward I. and that but by infpeximus.
Of Henry Ilf.
The laws of Henry ITT. contained in Magna Charta and Charta de
Forefta, both which are called Great Charters of the liberties of England ,
and were eftablilhed about the 9th year of Henry III. are for the moft
part but declaratory of the common municipal laws of England, and
that too no new declaration thereof ; for King John in the 17th year
of his reign had granted the like before, which was alfo called Magna
Charta. J And by the Englifh ftatute 25 Edw. I. c. 1. it is enafted,
That the Great Charter, and the Charter of the Forcft be taken as
the Common Law of England.
* I.eges W. I. Cap. 63. a pud Selden in not is ad eadm. p. 192.
$ Kid. Selden ui fupra. f Mat. Paris , ad an. 1215, pag. 253, <bc
X Coke's Pref. to the jecond Inft.
( 27 )
By what foregoes, I conceive it is very clear, that all the charters
and grants of liberties from Edward the Corifeiibr's time down to the
9th of Henry III. were but confirmations one of another, and all of
them declarations, and confirmations of the Common Law of Eng¬
land. And by the feveral eftablilhments, which we have formerly
mentioned, of the laws of England to be of force in Ireland : Firft,
in the 13th of Henry II. Secondly, in the 12th of King John. Third¬
ly, in the 12th of Henry III. All thofe laws and cuftoms of England,
which by thofe feveral charters were declared and confirmed to be the
laws of England, were eftabliflied to be of force in Ireland. And thus
Ireland came to be governed by one and the fame Common Law with
England ; and thofe laws continue as part of the municipal and fun¬
damental laws of both kingdoms to this day.
Englifh Statutes fince tjpe gth Henry Ilf- introduced in Ireland.
It now remains that we enquire, How the ftatute laws and a<fts of
parliament made in England fince the nth of Henry III. came to be of
force in Ireland ; and whether all or any of them, and which, are in
force here, and when and how they came to be fo.
An4 the firft precedent that occurs in our books, of ads of parlia¬
ment in Ireland particularly mentioning and confirming Ipecial acts of
parliament in England, Ns found in a marginal note of. Sir Richard
Bolton’s, formerly Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer in Ireland,
affixed in his edition of the Iriffi, Statutes to Stat. 10 Henry 7. Cap. 22.
to this purport, That in 13 Edw. II. by parliament in this realm of Ire¬
land the Statutes of Merton, made the 20th of Henry IJ. and the
Statutes of Marlbridge, made the 53d of Henry 111. the Statute of
Weftminfter the firft, made the 3d of Edward I. the Statute of Glpu-
cefttiy made the 6th of Edward I. and the Statute of Weftminfter the
fecond, made the 13th of Edward I. were ail confirmed in this king¬
dom, and all other Statutes which were of force in England, were re¬
ferred to be examined in the next parliament ; and fo many as were
then allowed and publiffied, to ftand likewife for laws in this kingdom
And in the 10th of Henry IV. it was enacted in this kingdom pf Ire¬
land, That the Statutes made in England ffioujd not be of force in
this kingdom, unlefs they were allowed and publiffied in this kingdom
by parliament. Arid the like Statute was made again in th? 29th of
Henry VI. * Thefe Statutes arc not to be found in the Rolls,, nor any
Parliament Roll of that time; but he (Sir Richard Bolton) had feen the
fame exemplified under' the Great Seal, and the exemplification re--
maineth in the trealury of the city of Waterford. Thus far the note.
If we coniider the frequent troubles n,nd di (fractions in Ireland, we
ffiall not wonder that thefe, and many other Rolls and Records, hav«
been loft in this kingdom : For from the third year of Edward IL
which was Anno 1310, through the whole reigns of Edward III.
Richard II. Henry IV. and Henry V. and fo to the ffiventh year of
Henry VI. Anqp J428, which is about 1,18 years, there are not, any
Parliament Rolls to be found L yet certain it is, that divers parlia-
* Vid. Lib. Ruhr. Scaccar. Ditbl.
t Annals of Ireland , at the end of Camden s Britan, Edit. 163 7, Page
196, 197, fcV. ’ V "
( 28 )
mcnt$ were held in Ireland in thofe times. J The fame may be laid
from Henry lid’s coming into Ireland, Anno 1172 to the third year
of Edward II. Anno 1310, about 138 years.
Perhaps it may be laid, that if there were fuch Statutes of Ireland
as the faid ads of the 10th of Henry IV. and the 29th of Henry VI.-
as they Ihew, that the parliaments of Ireland did think that Englifh
ads of parliament could not bind Ireland ; yet they fliew likewife, that
even in thofe days the parliaments of England did claim this fuperiori-
ty ; or elfe, to what purpofe were the laid a&s made unlefs in denial
of that claim ?
All which I hope may be readily granted without any prejudice to
the right of the Irifh parliaments : There is nothing lo common, as to
have one man claim another man’s right : And if bare pretence will
give a title, no man is fecure : And it will be yet worie, it when an¬
other fo pretends, and I infill on my right, my juft claim lhall be
turned to my prejudice, and to the difparagement of my title.
We know very well that many of the judges of our Four Courts
have been from time to time fent us out of England ; and fome of them
may eafily be fuppoled to come over hither prepolldfed with an opini¬
on of our parliaments being fubordinate to that of England. Or at
lead, fome of thenrf may be fcrupulous, and defirous of full fecurity
in this point; and 011 their account, and for their fatisfattion, luch
adls as aforefaid, may be devifed, and enadted in Ireland. But then,
God forbid, that thefe adts fhould afterwards be laid hold of to a clear
other intent than what they were framed for ; and inflead of declaring
and fecuring our rights, lhould give an handle of contell, by fhewing
that our rights have been queftioned of antient time.
In conclufion of all, if this fuperiority of the parliament of Eng¬
land have been doubted a great while ago, fo it has been as great a
while ago llrenuouily oppoled, and abfolutely denied by the parlia¬
ments of Ireland. And by the way, I lhall take notice, that from
whencefoever this ancient pretence of Ireland’s fubordination proceed¬
ed in thofe days, it did not arifp from the parliament of England it-
felf: For we have not one fingle inllance of an Englifh adt of parlia¬
ment exprefsly claiming this right of binding us: But we haye feveral
inffances of Irifh adls of parliament, exprefsly denying this fubordi-
liation, as appears by what foregoes.
Afterwards by a llatute made in Ireland the 18th of Henry VI.
cap. 1. all the flatutes made in England againlt the extortions and op-
prefiions of purveyors, are enadted to be holden and kept in all points*
and put in execution in this land of Ireland.
And in the 3.2d year of Henry VI. cap. 1. by a parliament in Ire¬
land, his enacted, That all the llatutcs made againlt provifors to the
court of Rome, as well in England as in Ireland, be had and kept in
force.
After this, in a parliament at Drogheda the 8th of Edward IV7.
cap. i . it was ratified, That the Englifh ftatute made againft rape,
made the 6th of Richard II. lhould be of force in Ireland Irom the
6th day of March lail pad : And that from henceforth the faid adt, apd
all other flatutes and acts made by authority of parliament within
$ Ibid. p. 160. ' Pryn againft ike 4 th Injl. chap. 76.
( 29 ) \ '
the realm of England, be ratified and confirmed, and adjudged by the
authority of this parliament in their force and flrength, from the faid
fixth day of March. We lhall hereafter have occaiion of taking far¬
ther notice of this flatute upon another account.
All Englifh Statutes before the io th c/^Henry VII. in force in Ireland.
Laflly, in a parliament held at Drogheda the loth of Henry VII.
cap. 22. it is enabled, That all flatutes late (that is, as the * learned
in the laws expound it, before that time) made in England, concern¬
ing the common and public weal of the fame, from henceforth be
deemed effe&uai in law, and be accepted, ufed and executed within
this land of Ireland in all points, See.
^ And in the 14th year of the fame King’s reign, in a parliament
held at Triflle-Dermot, it was ena<5le,d> That all acts of parliament
made in England for punching culfomers, controllers, and learchers,
for their mifdemeanors ; or for punifhment of merchants or fa&ors,
be of force here in Ireland, provided they be firfl proclaimed at Dub¬
lin, Drogheda, and other market-towns.
Thus we fee by what heps and degrees all the flatutes which were
made in England from the time of Magna Charta, to the 10th of
Henry VII. which did concern the common public weal, were receiv¬
ed, confirmed, allowed, and authorized to be of force in Ireland ; all
which was done by affent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the
Commons in the Parliament of Ireland affembled, and no otherwife.
Englifh Statutes declaratory of the Common Law in force in Ireland.
We (hall next enquire, Whether there are not other a£ts of the
Englifh parliament, both before and lince the 10th of Henry VII.
which were and are of force in Ireland, though not allowed of by
parliament in this kingdom. And we {hall find, that by the opinion
of our bed lawyers, there are divers fuch ; but then they are only
fuch as are declaratory of the ancient common law of England, and
not introdu&ive of any new law : For thefe become of force by the
firft general eflablifhment of the common laws of England in this
kingdom, under Henry II. King John, and Henry III. and need no
particular a<5t of Ireland for their fan&ion.
Englifh alls introduflive of a new law , not of force in Ireland.
As to thofe Englifh flatutes fince the 10th of Henry VII. that are
introdu<5live of a new law, it was never made a quellion whether they
fhould bind Ireland, without being allowed in parliament here ; till
of very late years this doubt began to be moved ; and how it has been
carried on and promoted, {hall appear more fully hereafter.
I fay, till of very late years ; for the ancient precedents which we
have to the contrary, are very numerous. Amongfl many, we fliall
mention the following particulars.
* Coke's \th Inf it. Cap. 76. /. 3$ !.
4 Vid. lrijb St at.
. ; ’ V , ; . ■ . ». tv . > ; • . . ,
In the 2 1 ft 61 fleriry VIII. an ad was made in England making it
felony in a fervant that runneth away with his mailer’s or miftreis’s
goods. This ad was not received in Ireland till it was enaded by a
parliament held here iil the. 33d of Henry VIII. c. 5. fef. 1.
In the 2 1 ft of Henry VIII. c. 19. there was a law made in England,
that all Lords rriight didram on the lands of them holden, and make
their avowry not naming the tenant, but the land. But this was not
of torCe in Ireland till enaded here in the 33d of Henry VIII. c. i.
fef. 1*
An std was made in England, arino 31 Henry VIII. that joint*
tcriaxits and tenants in common ihould be compelled to make partiti¬
on, as coparceners were compellable at common law. But this ad wa*
not received in Ireland till enaded here an. 33 Henry VIII. c. 10.
Anno 27th Henry VIII. c. 10. the ftatute for transferring ufes into
poifellion was; made in England ; but not admitted in Ireland till
xo Car. 1. fef. 2.
Iii like manner, the Englifh ftatute 33d Henry VI II. c. i. direding
how lands and tenements may be difpofed by Will, See. was not of
force iii Ireland till 10 Car. 2. fef. 2.
The Ad of Uniformity of Common Prayer and Ad mini fixation of
the Sacraments was made in England the ift of Eli/, c. 2. blit w!£$ not
eftablifhed in Ireland till the 2d of Eli/, c. '! '■> And fo that of England
14th Car. 2. c. 14* was not received in Ireland till 17 Sc 18 Car. 2. c. 6.
The Statute againft Wilful Perjury made in England 5 Eliz. c. 9.
was not enaded in Ireland till 28 Eliz. c. 1.
So the Englifh Ad againft Witchcraft and Sorcery made 5 Eliz.
c. 1 6. And another Ad againft f orgery, 5th Eliz. c. 14. were, nei¬
ther of them in force in Ireland till the 28th of her reign, cap. 3 & 4.
The EnglifK Statute againft Pirates was made the 28th of Henry
VIII. c. 15. but not in Ireland till the 12th of King James, c. ■%.
In England an Ad was made the 27th of Eliz. c. 4 againft fraudu¬
lent conveyances ; but it was not in force in Ireland till enaded here
the 10th of Charles, c. 3. fef. 2, , r
In the 15th year of King Charles I. in a parliament held at Dublin,
there were iix Englifh Statutes made laws of this kingdom, with fuch
alterations as beft fitted them to the ft ate thereof, viz. •
2i Jac. c. 14. For pleading the general ifiue in intrufions brought
by the King, by chap. 1. of the Irifh ftatutes.
31 Eliz. c. 2. For abridging of proclamations on fines, by chap. 2.
2 and 3 Edw. 6. c. 8. Concerning offices before the efeheator, by
chap. 4. -
31 Eliz. c. 1. Difcontinuance of writs of error in the Exchequer
Chamber, by chap. 5.
8 Eliz. c. 4. and 18 Eliz. c. 7. Concerning Clergy, by chap. 7.
24 Hen. 8. c. 5. Concerning killing a robber, by chap. 9.
Thereare fix Englilh ftatutes likewife paffed in the time of K. Charles
II. upon and i'oon after the reftoration, fome of which were not paffed
into laws in Ireland till a year, two, or three, afterwards : As will
appear by confulting the ftatute books *.
* Irijh Stat. 13 C. 11. c. 2. 13 C. II. c. 3. 1 4 and 15 C. IT. c. I. i4
a-nd 15 C. II. c. 19. 17 and 18 C. 11. c.
1 7 and 18 C. II. c. 1 1.
■ ( 31 ) '• •
And in the firft year of William and Mary, fef. 2. c. 9, an aft paffed
in England declaring all attainders, and other afts made in the late
pretended parliament under King James at Dublin, void : But was
not enafted here in Ireland till the 7th year of King William, c. 3.
And this was thought requifite to be done upon mature confederation
thereon before the King and Council of England f, notwithftanding
that the Englifh aft does particularly name Ireland, and was wholly
dcfigned for, and relates thereto.
The like may we find in feveral other ftatutes of England paffed
fmce his prefent Majefty’s acceflion to the throne, which have after-
wards been paffed here in Ireland, with fuch alterations as make them
practicable and agreeable to this kingdom. Such as are amongft
others, the aft for difarming papifts. The aft of recognition. The
aft for taking away Clergy from fome offenders. The aft for taking
fpecial bail in the country, &c. The aft againft clandeftine mort¬
gages. The aft againft curling mid fwearing.
Thefe, with many more, are to be found in our ftatute books in the
feveral reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. Queen Elizabeth, King
James, King Charles I. and lid. and King William. But it is not
to be found in any records in Ireland, that ever any aft of parlia¬
ment introduftive of a new law made in England fmce the time of
King John, was by the judgment of any court receivedTor law, or
put in execution in the realm of Ireland before the fame was confirmed
and affented to by parliament in Ireland.
And thus I prelume we have pretty clearly made out our fourth en¬
quiry forementioned ; and fhewn plainly the feveral fteps by which
the Englifti form of government, and the Englilh ftatute laws were
received in this kingdom ; and that; this was wholly by the people’s con*
fent in parliament, to which we have had a very ancient right, and
as full a right as our next neighbours can pretend to or challenge.
Objections anfwered,
I * . ; > rw ... • *
I (hall now confider the objections and difficulties that are moved on
this head drawn from precedents, and paffages in our law-books, that
may feem to prove the contrary.
Objections from the Statute cf Rape ,
Firft ftis ur^ed, That in the Trilh aft concerning rape, paffed anno
8 Edward IV. c. 1. ’tis expreffed, that a doubt was conceived whe¬
ther the Englifh ftatute of the 6th of Richard II. c. 6. ought to be of
force in Ireland without a confirmation thereof in the parliament of
Ireland. Which lhews (as fome alledge) that even in thole days it was
held by fome, that an aft of parliament in England might bind Ire¬
land before it be confented to in parliament here.
Englijh St at. 1 2 C. II. c. 1 2. 1 2 C. II. c. 3. 12 C. II. c. 14. 12 C* II.
c . 24. 12 C.I1. c. 33. 16 and 17 C. II. c. 5.
f For we had two feveral ads tranfmitted to us at different times, 1 9
this very purpofe. One we rejeded in the Lord Sydney s government, the
other we pajjed under the Lord Cap ell.
( 3* )
Bat I conceive this glofs is railed merely for want of exprefting the
jreafioii of the laid doubt in the Irifn ftatute of , the 8th of Edward IV.
c. i. which we may reafonably judge was this. By the ftatute of Weft-
minder the 2d. c. 34. a woman that eloped from her hulband and
lived 'with the adulterer, or a wife that being firft ravilhed did after¬
wards confent, and lived with the raviftier, Ihe lliould lofe her dower.
This ftatute of Weftminfter the 2d, was made of force in Ireland by
an aft paifed here the 13th of Edward 11. as wehavefeen before. Af¬
terwards by the Englifti ftatute of the 6th of Richard II. c. 6. there
was a farther addition made to the laid ftatute of Weftminfter the 2d,
to this effeft, that a maiden or wife being ravilhed, and afterwards
confenting to the ravilhers, as well the raviftier as ihe that was ravilh¬
ed fhal! be difabledto claim all inheritance or dower, after the death
of her hulband or.anceftor.
On this account the doubt was here railed in Ireland in the 8th of
Edward IV. c. 1. Whether this latter Englifti ftatute of the 6th of
Richard II. c. 6. were not in force in Ireland by virtue of the Irifh
ftatute of the 13th of Edward II. which confirmed the ftatute of
Weftminfter the 2d. c. 34. And for fettling this doubt the faid ftatute
of the 8th of Edward IV. e. *. was palled in Ireland, and we find
•very good reafon for the faid doubt. For the Englifh ftatute of the
6th of Richard II. c. 6. contained but a fmall addition to the ftatute
of Weftminfter the 2d, c. 34. and we fee that even this addition itfelf
was judged not to be of force in Ireland till enacted here. For the
faid Irifti ftatute of the 8th of Edward IV. c. 1. makes the faid fta*-
tute of the 6th of Richard II. c. 6. of force in Ireland only from the
6th of March then laft paft.
’Tis urged fecondiy, that though perhaps fuch afts of parliament
in England which do not name Ireland, ftiall not be conftrued to bind
Ireland, yet all fuch Englifti ftatutes as mention Ireland, either by
the general words of all his Majefty’s dominions, or by particularly
naming of Ireland, are and (hall be of force in this kingdom.
This being a doftrinc firft broached directly (as 1 conceive) by Will.
Huffey, Lord Chief Juftice of the King’s Bench in England, in the
firft year of Henry VII. and of late revived by Lord Chief Juftice
Coke, and ftrongly urged, and much relied upon in thefe latter days ;
I lhall take the liberty of enlarging thereon, though 1 venture thereby
to iwcll this pamphlet to a fizc greater than I defire or defigned.
Qbjcfl. Englifti Statutes comprehending Ireland by general Words.
Firft, therefore, as to fuch Englilh ftatutes as feem to comprehend
Ireland, and to bind it, under the general words of all his Majefty’s
dominions or fubjefts, whatever has been the opinion of private and
particular lawyers in this point, I am lure the opinions of the Kings
of England, and their Privy Council, have been otherwife : ’Tis well
known fine e Poynings’ aft in Ireland, the 10th of Henry VII. no aft
can pafs in our parliament here, till it be firft aftented to by the King
and Privy Council of England, and tranfmitted hither under the broad
feai of England : Now the King and his Privy Council there, have
been io far from furmifmg that an aft of parliament of England,
mentioning only in general all the King’s dominions, or fubjefts,
ikould bind Ireland, that they haye dearly ftiewn the contrary, by
C 33
frequently tranfmitting to Ireland, to be palled into laws here, Eng-
Jifh ftattutes, wherein the general words of all the King’s dominions
or fubjedts were contained j which would have been, to no purpofe, but
merely to do what was already done, had Ireland been bound before by
tliofe Engliffi ftatutes.
Of this I lhall give die following examples, amongft many others.
Adis cigainjl appeals to Rome.
The adt of parliament in England againft appeals to Rome, 24 Hen¬
ry VIII. c. 12. by exprefs words extends to all his Majefty’s dominions*
yet the fame was not in force, nor received in Ireland, till it was
enadted by parliament there, the 28th of Henry VIII. c. 6.
Adis of Firf Fruits and Faculties.
. In like manner the ftatutes made in England concerning Fil'd Fruits,
26 Henry VIII. c. 3. and the Adt of Faculties, * 25 Henry VIII.
c. 21. though each of them by exprefs words comprize all his iVIajeily’s.
fubjedts and dominions, were not received as laws in Ireland, till the
former was enadted there, 28 Henry VIII. c. 4. and the latter the
28 Henry VIII. c. 19. and fo the ftatute reftoring to the crown all
jurifdidtion ecclefiaftical made in England, anno 1 Eliz. c. 1. and there*
in giving power to eredt an Ecclefiaftical High-Commiffion-Court in
England and Ireland, yet was not of force in Ireland till enadted there,
anno 2 Eliz. t. t. And though the laid Englilh adt, in relation to
erecting fuch an High-Commiffion-Court, was repealed, 17 Car. 1.
c. ix. and the repeal confirmed the 13 Car. 2. c. 12. And the late
Rill of rights, 1 W. and M. fef. 2. c. 2. in England has damned all
fuch' courts. Yet the adt in Ireland 2 Eliz. c. 1. remains ftill in force
here ; and fo it was lately declared here by the Lord High-Chancel¬
lor Porter, Lord Chief JuRice Reynel, Lord Chief Baron Hely, Mr.
Jufiice Cox, Mr. Juftice Jeffreyfon, in the cafe of Dr. Thomas Hac-
ket, late Biffiop of Down, who was deprived of the faid biffiopric by fuch
a commiffion, for great enormities ; the commiffioners being Dr. Dop-
ping late Bilhop of Meath, Dr. King, the prefent Biffiop of London-
Derry, and Dr. Wifeman, late Biffiop of Dromore.
By the fame rcctfon Scotland nlay be bound ,
And truly I fee no more reafon for binding Ireland by the Englilh
laws under the general words of all his Majefty’s dominions or fubjedts,
than there is for binding Scotland by the fame ; for Scotland is a9
much his dominion, and Scots-men as much his fubjedts as Ireland and
Irilh-men: If it be faid, that Scotland is an ancient feparate and dif-
tindt kingdom from England; I fay, fo is Ireland : The difference is,
Scotland continued feparate from the Kings of England till of late
years, and Ireland continued feparate from England but a Very little
while in the perfon of King John, before the death of his father, and
of his brother Richard I. without iflue. But then ’tis to be confider-
ed, that there was a poffibility, or even a probability, that Ireland
* Title in the Enplilb Statute* is, No impofition fhall be paid to the
Sijbcf of Rome. C
' •( 34 )
might have continued feparate from the crown of England, even t®
this very day, if Richard I. had left behind him a numerous progeny.
Englifh Statutes naming Ireland.
Secondly, As to fuch Englifh Statutes as particularly name Ireland,
and are therefore faid to be of force in this kingdom, tho’ never cnadt-
cd here; I fhali confider only the more ancient precedents that are
offered in confirmation of this dodtrine ; For as to thofe of later date,
’tis thefe we complain of, as bearing hard on the liberties of this coun¬
try, and the rights of our parliaments, and therefore thefe ought not
to be produced as arguments againfl us. I prefume, if I can fhew,
that the ancient precedents that are produced, do not conclude againfl
us i it will follow, that the modern instances given, ought not to cpn-
clude againfl us ; that is to fay plainly, thefe ought not to have been
made as they are, as wanting foundation both from authority and
reafon.
The ancient precedents of Englifh flatutes, particularly naming Ire¬
land, and faid to be made in England with adefrgn of binding Ireland,
are chiefly thefe three :
1. Statute of Ireland , 14 Henry III .
2. An ordinance for Ireland, 17 Edward I.
3. And the adl that all flaple commodities pafling out of England or
Ireland, fhali be carried to Calais, as long as the flaple is at Calais,
2 Henry VI. c. 4. on which Huffey delivered his opinion, as we fhali
fee more fully hereafter.
Thefe flatutes, efpecially the two firfl, being made for Ireland, as
their titles import, have given occafion to think, that the parliament
of England have a right to make laws for Ireland, without the confent
of their chofen reprefentatives. But if We enquire farther into this
matter, we fhali find this conclufion not fairly deduced.
Firfl, The Statute of Ireland , 14 Hen. III. as 'tis to be found in
the cohesion of Englifh flatutes, is plainly thus : The Judges in Ire¬
land conceiving a doubt concerning inheritances devolved to Afters or
coheirs, viz. Whether the younger fillers ought to hold of the eldefl
After, and do homage unto her for their portions, or of the chief
Ford, and do homage unto him; therefore Gerald Fitz Maurice, the
then Lord Juftice of Ireland, difpatched four Knights to the King in
England, to bring a certificate from thence of the practice there ufed,
and what was the common-law of England in that cafe. Whereupon
Henry III. in this his certificate or refeript, which is called Statute
of Ireland, meerly informs the juftice what the law and cuftom was in
England, viz. That the Afters ought to hold of the chief Lord, and
not of the eldefl After. And the clofe of it commands, that the afore-
faid cuftoms that be ufed within our realm of England in this cafe, be
proclaimed throughout our dominion of Ireland, and be there ob-
ferved. Witnefs myfelf at IV ejhn infer, 9 Feb. An. Reg. 14.
From whence ’tis manifeft, that this Statute of Ireland was no
more than a certificate of what the common law of England was in
that cafe, which Ireland by the original compact was to be governed
by. And fhews no more, that therefore the parliament of England
may bind Ireland, than it would have proved, that the common¬
wealth of Rome was fubje<5t to Greece, if, after Rome had received
( 35 )
the law of the Twelve Tables, they had fent to Greece to know what
die Jaw was, in lbme fpecial cafe.
0 rdi nance for Ireland.
The ftatute called Ordinance for Ireland , made at Notting¬
ham the i 7th of Edward I. and to be found in Pul tou’s collection,
page 76. Edit. Lond. 1670, was certainly never received, or of force,
in Ireland. This is rhariifeft from the very firft article of that ordi¬
nance, which prohibits the juftice of Ireland or others the King’s-
officers there to purchafe land in that kingdom, or within their re-
fpeftive bailiwicks without the King’s licence, on pain of forfeitures.
But that this ha$ ever been otherwife, and that the Lords Jiiftices, and
other officers here have purcliafed binds in Ireland, at their own will
and pleafure, needs iio proof to thofe who have the lead knowledge ot
this country. Nor does it appear by any iriquifition, office, or other
record, that aiiy oiie ever forfeited on that account.
Moreover this Ordinance far Ireland , is really in itfelf no aft”
of parliament, but merely an ordinance of the King and his Privy
Council in England ; which appears as well from the preamble to the
faid ordinance, as from this bbftervation likewife, that King Edward I.
held no parliament in the 17th year of his reign: Or if this were a
parliament, this Ordinance for Ireland , is the only aft thereof that
is extant : But ’tis very improbable, that only this fmgle ordinance
ihould appear, if any luch parliament were called together.
Staple Aft.
Thirdly, As to the Staple- Aft, 2 Henry VI. c. 4. which exprefsly
names Ireland, and Huftey’s opinion thereon. The cafe, as we find it
in the year-books of Mich. 2 Ric. III. fol. 11. and Mich. 1 Hen. VII.
tol. 3. is in fhort thus : The merchants of Waterford having {hipped,
olf fortie wool, and confighed it to Sluice in Flanders, the ffiip by ftrefi
.ot weather was put in at Calais, where Sir Thomas Thwaites, Trea¬
surer of Calais, feized the faid wool as forfeited, half to himfelf, and
halt to the King, by the faid ftatute ; hereupon a fuit was commenced
between the faid merchants and the faid treafurer, which was brought
before all the Judges of England into the Exchequer Chamber : T he
merchants pleaded the King’s licence to the citizens of Waterford and
their fucceliors, for carrying wool where they pleafed ; and the quef-
tions before the judges were two, viz. Whether this Staple-aft binds
Ireland ; and fecondly, Whether the King could grant his licence con¬
trary to the ftatute, and efpecially where the ftatute gives half the
forfeiture to the difeoveren
The firft point only relates to our prefent purpofe ; and herein we
find the forefaid year-book of 2 Rich. III. fol. 12. to report it thus :
And there (in the Exchequer Chamber ) they declared that in the king¬
dom of Ireland they have parliaments and courts in every refpeft as in
England : And by their own parliament they make and change laws, and
are not hound by Jlatutes made in England ; becaufe they have not Knights
of Parliament here , (and is not this an unanfwerable reafon?) hut this is
to he underjlood only concerning the affelting of lands and property in that
kingdom : For their perfons are the King's fiibjeds $ and as fubjefts they
( 3<5 )
fhall be bound , nx beh out of that territory, not to do any thing contrary
to the Jlatutes (of England ), like the inhabitants of Calais , Gaf coign f
Guietine , &c. nvhiljl they were fubjefls. And they Jhall be obedient to the
Admiralty of England as touching any thing committed on the high feas.
And in like manner there fhall be a writ of error from a judgment given
ih Ireland, to the King's Bench here in England.
I have verbatim tranferibed this paflage out of the forefaid year¬
book, that I might be fure to omit nothing that may give the objection
its full weight. And all that I can anfwer to it, is this :
1. That when the forefaid cafe came a fecond time under the con-
fideration of the Judges in the Exchequer Chamber in Mich, i Hemv
VII. fol. 3. we find it reported thus: Hu (fey the Chief Juftice faid,
That the ftatutes made in England fhall bind ihofe of Ireland, which
was not much gain-faid by the other Judges, notwithftanding that
fome of them were of a contrary opinion the laft term in his abfence.
How the prefence and opinion of the Chief Juftice came to influence
them now, I leave the reader to judge.
2. That Brook in abridging this cafe of the firft of Hen. VII. fol. 3.
Title Parliament, Sec. 90. adds, olferve notwithftanding, that Ireland
is a kingdom by itfelf, and hath parliaments of its own ; intimating
thereby, that therefore Hufley’s opinion herein was unreafonable.
3. That ’tis manifeft, if Huffey mean by his words, That all adts of
parliament in England fhall bind Ireland, it is diredUy contrary to the
Judges opinion in the fecond of Richard Ill. before recited ; for within
the land of Ireland, they are all pofitive, that the authority of the
parliament of England will not affedt us. They feem at the utmoft
reach to extend the jurifdidHon of the Englilh parliament over the
fubjedls of Ireland, only in relation to their adfions beyond feas, out
of the realm of Ireland, as they are the Ring bf England’s fubjedts ;
but even this will appear unreafonable, when we confider, that by the
fame argumentation, Scotland itfelf may be bound by Englilh laws,
in relation- to their foreign trade, as they are the King of England's
fubjedls. The queftion is, Whether England and Ireland be two dif-
tineft kingdoms, and whether they have each their refpedtive parlia¬
ments ; neither of which will be denied by any man ; and if fo, there
can be no fubordination on either fide, each is compleat in its own
jurifdiction, and ought not to interfere with the other in any thing. If
being the King of England’s fubjects, be a reafon why we ought to
fubmit to laws, (in relation, to our trade abroad, in places where the
parliament of England has no jurifdidHon) which have not received
our aflent ; the people of England will confider whether they'alfo are
not the King’s fubjedts, and may therefore (by this way of reafoning)
he bound by laws which the King may aftign them without their aflent,
in relation to their addons abroad, or foreign trade : Or whether they
had not been fubjedls to the. King of France, had our Kings continued
their poflelTion of that country, and there kept the feat of the monar¬
chy ; and then, had France been ftronger than England it might
Seem that the fubjedts of tliefe kingdoms might have been bound by¬
laws made at Paris, without their own confent. — But let this dodtrine-
never be mentioned amongft the free-born fubjedts of thefe nations.
Thus I have done with the three principal inftances that are ulu ally-
brought againft ns, on the ftrefs that is laid on Englilh adts of parlia¬
ment, particularly naming Ireland.
'( 37 ) .
Members from Ireland in the parliament cf England.
There have been other ftatutes or ordinances made in England for
Ireland, which may reafonably be of force here, becaufe they were
made and alfented to by our own reprefentatives. Thus we find in
the White-Book of the Exchequer in Dublin, in the 9th year of Ed¬
ward I. a writ fent to his Chancellor of Ireland, wherein he mentions
Some fatutes lately made at Lincoln , and fame others afterward at York ,
by us with the confent cf the Prelates , Earls , Barons , and Commons of
our kingdom of Ireland. Tnefe we may fuppofe were either ftatutes
made at the requeft of the ftates of Ireland, to explain to them the
common law of England ; or if they were inti odu&ive of new laws,
yet they might well be of force in Ireland, being enacted by the af*
fent of our own reprefentatives, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal?
and Commons of Ireland ; as the words aforementioned do lhew :
And indeed, thefe are inftanccs fo far from making againft our claim,
that I think nothing can be more plainly for us ; for it manifeftly
(hews, that the King and parliament of England would not enact
laws to bind Ireland, without the concurrence of the reprefentatives
of this kingdom.
Formerly, when Ireland was but thinly peopled, and the Englifh
laws not fully current in all parts of the kingdom, Ttis probable that
then they could not frequently alfemble with conveniency or fafety to
make laws in their own parliaments at home ; and therefore during the
heats of rebellions, or confufion of the times, they were forced to
enatft laws in England. But then this was always by their proper re¬
prefentatives : For we find that in the reign of Edward III. (and by
what foregoes, ’tis plain ’twas fo in Edward I/s time) Knights of the
Shire, Citizens, and Burgeffes, were elected in the {hires, cities, and
boroughs of Ireland, to ferve in parliament in England, and have fo
ferved accordingly. For amongft the records of the Tower of Lon¬
don, Rot. Clauf. 50. Edw. 3- Pari. 2. Memb. 23. we find a writ from
the King at W’eftminfter, directed to James Butler, Loyd Jullice of
Ireland, and to R. Archbifhop of Dublin, his Chancellor, requiring
them to iiTue writs under' the great feal of Ireland, to the feveral
counties, cities, and boroughs, for fatisfying the expences of the men
of that land, who laft came over to ferve in parliament in England.
And in another roll the 50th of Edward III. Memb. 1 9* on complaint
to the King by John Draper, who was chofen Burgefs of Ccvrke by
writ, and ferved in the parliament of England, and yet was denied
his expences by fome df the citizens, care was taken to re-irriburfe him.
If from thefe laft mentioned records, it be concluded that .the par¬
liament of England may bind Ireland ; it muft alfo be allowed that the
people of Ireland ought to have their reprefentatives in the parliament
of England.
This fending of reprefentatives out of Ireland to the parliament in
England, on fome occafions, was found in procefs of time to be very
troublefome and inconvenient; and this, we may prefume, was the
reafon, that afterwards, when times were more fettled, we fell again
into our old track, and regular courfe of parliaments in our own
country; and hereupon the laws afore-noted, were enabled.
( 3s )
eftablifhipg that no law ipade in the parliament of England, fhould be
of force in Ireland, till it was allowed and publifhed in parliament here.
Modern acts of the parliament of England, naming Ireland.
I have faid before, p. 49. that I would only confider the more an-
tient precedents that are offered to prove, That ads of England par¬
ticularly nafning Ireland, fhould bind us in this kingdom ; and indeed
it were diffident to hop here, for the reafon above alledged. However
1 fhal] venture to come down lower, and to enquire into the modern
precedents of Englifh ads of parliament alledged againfl us : But flill
with this obfervation,* that ’tis thefe we complain againfl as innovations,
and therefore they ought not to be brought in argument againfl us.
1 I do therefore again affert, that before the year 1641, there was no
ilatute made in England introductory of a new law that interfered
with the right which the people of Ireland have to make laws for
themfelves, except only thofe' which we have before mentioned, and
which we have difeuffed at lar^e, and 'fubmit to the readers judgment.
But in the year :6q.i, and afterwards in Cromwell’s time, and fmee
that, in King Charles II. and again very lately in King William’s
reign, fome laws have been made in England to be of force in Ireland.
But how this came to pafs, we fhall now enquire. 1 1
Vv • l‘ * i'. ‘ '« *• p
Acts in favour of Adventurers in 1641.
In the 17th year of King Charles I. which was in the year 1642,
there were three or four ads of parliament made in England for en¬
couraging Adventurers to raife money for the fpeedy fuppreflion of the
horrid rebellion which broke’ out in Ireland the 23d of Odober 1641.
The titles of thefe ads we have' in Pulton’s Colledion of Statutes:
But with this remark, That they are made of no force by the Ads of
Settlement and Explanation palled in King Charles lid’s time in the
kingdom of Ireland’. ’ So that in thefe we are fofar from finding pre¬
cedents for England’s parliament binding Ireland, that they plainly
ihew, that the parliament of Ireland may repeal an ad paffed in Eng¬
land, in relation to the affairs of Ireland.' For ’tis very well knowu,
that perfons who were to have intereft's and titles in Ireland by virtue
of thofe ads palled in England, are cut off by the Ads of Settlement
and Explanation. 'And indeed there is all the reafon in the world that
it fhould be fo, and that ads made in a kingdom by the legal repre-
fentatives of the people, fhould take place cf thofe made in another
kingdom. ’-But However, it will be laid, that by thofe ads ’cis mani-
felt that England did prefume they had fuch a right to pafs ads bind¬
ing Ireland, or elfe they had ne’er done it ' To which I anfwcr, that
confidering the condition Ireland was in at that time, viz. under an
horrid intedine rebellion, flaming in every corner of the kingdom ;
’twas impoffible to have a parliament of our own ; yet it was abfolute-
ly neceffary that fomething fhould be done towards fuppreffmg the vio¬
lences then raging amongll us : And the only means could then bo
pradifed, was for the parliament of England to interpofe, and do
Something for our relief and fafety ; thefe were the bell affu ranees
could be had at that jundure ; but when the dorm was over, and the
kingdom quieted, we fee new mcafures were taken ja a legal parlia¬
ment of qur own, . <
( 39 )
V ,
ASs in Cromwell’s time.
>v
As to what was done for Ireland in the parliament of England in.
Cromwell’s time, befides the confufion and irregularity of all proceed-"
ing in thofe days, which hinders any of them to be brought into pre¬
cedent in thefe times ; we (hall find alfo that then there were repre-
fentatives fent out of this kingdom, who fate in the parliament of
England, which then was only the Houfe of Commons. We cannot
therefore argue from hence, that England may bind us ; for we fee
they allowed us reprefentatives, without which, they rightly conclud¬
ed, they could not make laws obligatory to us.
I come now to King Charles the 2d’s time ; and in it we fhall find
life following Englifh ftatutes made, in which the kingdom of Ireland
is concerned.
Cattle AS.
The firft is an aft againft importing cattle from Ireland or other
parts beyond feas. It was only temporary by i B Gh. 2. c. 2. but made
perpetual 20 Ch. 2. c. 7. and 32 Ch. 2. c. 2. This aft, however
prejudicial to the trade that was then carried on between Ireland and
England, does not properly bind us, more than it does any other
country of the world. When any thing is imported, and landed in
England, it becomes immediately fubjeft to the laws thereof, fo that
herein v/e cannot be faid properly to be bound.
Tobacco AS.
Secondly, the afts againft planting tobacco in England and Ireland*
1 2 Ch. 2. c. 34. and 15 Ch- 2. c. 7. and 22 and 23 Ch. 2. c. 26. &c
do pofttively bind Ireland. But there has never been an occafion o^
executing it here ; for I have not heard that a rood of tobacco was
ever planted in this kingdom. But however that takes not off the
obligation of the law : ’lis only want of our confent, that I urge
againft that. I fee no more reafon for fending a force to trample
•down an acre of tobacco in Ireland by thefe ftatutes, than there
.would be for cutting down the woods of Shelela, were there an aft
made in England againft our planting or having timber.
Navigation AS.
Thirdly, the aft for encouraging (hipping and navigation, by exprefs
name mentions and binds Ireland ■, apd by the iaft claufe in the aft,
obliges all (hips belonging thereto importing any goods from our
foreign plantations, to touch firft at England.
Fourthly, the afts prohibiting the exportation of wool from Ireland,
to any country except to England, do likewife ftrongly bind us, and
by the 12 Car. 2. c. 32. it was made highly penal on us, and by the
14th of Car. 2. c. 18. ’tis made felony. *
* Exporting wool from Ireland , is made penal by the lrifb fiat. 13
Hen. 8. c. 2. 28 Hen. 8. c. 17. But both thefe Jlatutes are olfolele : The
like may we obferve of the 1 1 Elia. (. jo, and \ 2 Elia, c, 4.
( 4* ,)
•To thefe three laft aft s, I rriuft confefs, I have nothing to urge, to
take off their efficacy ; name us they Jo mod certainly, and bind us
fo, as. we do. not tranfgrefs them- But how rightfully they do this, is
the matter in queftion. This I am fare of, that before thefe afts in
King Charles the Second’s time, (the cldeft of which is not overthir-
ty-leyen years) there is not one politive full precedent to be met with
in all the ftatuteffiook, of an Engliffi afl binding the kingdom of Ire¬
lands And on this account we may venture to affert, that thefe are
at leaf! innovations on us, as not being warranted by any former
precedents.
And (ball proceedings only of thirty-feven years handing, be urged
againft a nation, to deprive them, of the rights and liberties which
‘they enjoyed for five hundred years before, and which were invaded
: without and againft their confent, and from that day to this have
been conftantly complained of ? Let any Engliffi heart that ftands fo
juftly in vindication of his own rights and liberties, anfwer this quef¬
tion, and I have done.
Engliffi Afls 'binding Ireland Jince King William’/ Reign .
I am now arrived at our prelent days, under the happy government
of his Majefty King William the Third; and I am lorry to reflect,
that fmce the late revolution in thefe kingdoms, when the fubjefts of
England have more ftrenuoufly than ever alferted their own rights,
and the liberty of parliaments, it has pleafed them to bear harder on
their poor neighbours, than has ever yet been done in many ages
foregoing. J am fure what was then done by that wife and juft body
of fenators, was perfectly out of good-will and kindnefs to us, under
►thofe miferies which our affliftec]. country of Ireland then fuffered.
But 1 fear fome men have fince that, made ufe of what was then done
to other purpofes than at fir ft intended. Let us now fee what that'
was, and conlidcr the circurqftances under which it was done.
In the year 1 6S9, when mod of the Proteftant nobility, gentry,
and clergy of Ireland, were driven out of that kingdom hy the info-
lencies and barbarities of the Irifh Papifts, who were then in arms
throughout the kingdom, and in all places of authority under King
James, newly returned to them out of France; the only refuge we
had to fly to was in England, where multitudes continued for many
months, deftitute of all manner of relief, but fuch as the charity of
England afforded, which indeed was very munificent, and never to
be forgotten. • ' - - *v /• • - ! " ’
Adi for the Proteftant Irifh Clergy.
The Proteftant Clergy of Ireland being thus banifhed from their
benefices, many of them accepted fuch finall ecclefiaftical promotions
in England, as the benevolence of well difpofed perfons prefented them
with. But this being direflly contrary to a ftatute in this kingdom,
in the 17 and )S ©f Charles the Second, cap. 10. intituled, “ An act
for dilabling of fpiritual perfons from holding benefices or other ec-
clefiaftical dignities in England or Wales, and in Ireland at the fama
time.” The Proteftant Irilh clergy thought they could not be too fc-
cure in avoiding the penalty of the laft mentioned aft, and therefore
■applied themfeives to the Parliament of England, and obtained aa
;( 41 )
atSt in die fjrft year of King William and Queen Mary, c. 29, intituled
“ An adt for die relief of the Proteftant Irifh clergy.” And this was
the firft attempt that was made for binding Ireland by an adt in Eng¬
land, lince his Majcliy’s happy acceflion to the throne of thejfe king¬
doms. " * ‘ '
' »»
A cl againjl commerce with France.
Afterwards in the fame year, and fame feiTion, chap. 34. there pah*
ed an adt in England, prohibiting all trade and commerce with France,
both from England and Ireland. This alfo binds Ireland, but was
during the heat of the war in that kingdom, when ’twas impoftiblcto
-have a regular Parliament therein, all being in the hands of the Irifh
Papifts. Neither do we complain of it, as hindering us from corref-
ponding with the King’s enemies, for his the duty of all good fub-
jedts to abftain from that. But as Scotland, though the King’s fub-
jedts, claims an exemption from all laws but what they aifent to in Par¬
liament; fo we think this our right alfo.
When the baniftied laity of Ireland obftrved the clergy thus careful
to fecure their properties, and provide for the word as well as they
could in that jundture, yvhen no other means could be taken by a re¬
gular Parliament in Ireland ; they thought it likewife advifeable for
them to do fomething in relation to their concerns. And accordingly
they obtained the Adi for the better fecurity and relief of their Ma-
jeflies Proteftant fubjedls of Ineland, 1 W. and M. fef. 2. c. 9. Where¬
in King James's Irifh Parliament at Dublin, and all adls and attainders
done by them, are declared void. ’Tis likewife thereby enadted, that
no Proteftant faall fuffer any prejudice in his eftate or office, by reafon
of his abfence out of Ireland, lince December 25, 1685 ; and that
there fhould be a remittal of the King’s quit-rent, from 23 December
1688, to the end of the war. Thus the laity thought themfelves fe¬
cure.
And we cannot wonder that during the heat of a bloody war in this
kingdom, when it was impoftible to fecure our eftates and properties
by a regular Parliament of our own ; we fhould have recourlc to this
means, as the only which then could be had. We concluded with our-
felves that when we had obtained thefe adt§ from the parliament in Eng ¬
land, we had gone a great way in feegring the like adls to be palled in a
regular Parliament in Ireland, whenever it lhould pleafe God to re-
eftablilh us in our own country : For we well knew our own conlli-
tution under Poynings lav/, that no adt could pais in the Parliament of
Ireland till approved of by the King and Privy Council of England.
And we knew likewife, that all the Lords and others of his Majefty’s
Privy Council in England are members of the Lords or Commons
Houfe of parliament there. And that by obtaining their alfent to adls
of Parliament in favour of the Irilh Proteftants, they had in a manner
pre-engaged their afient to the like bills when they lhould hereafter
come before them as Privy Counfellors, in order to be regularly tranf-
mitted to the Parliament of Ireland, there to be palled into laws of
that kingdom. But inftead of all this, to meet with another conftruc-
tion of what was done herein, and to have it pleaded againft us as
? precedent of our fubmiftlon, and abfolutc acquiescence in the jurif-
( 4* )
' di&lon of the Parliaments of England over this kingdom, is what
we complain of as an invafion (we humbly conceive) of that legifla*
tive right which our Parliament of Ireland, claims within this king¬
dom.
Afi appointing new Oaths.
The next ad palled in the parliament of England, binding Ireland*
is that for abrogating the oath of fupremacy in Ireland, and appoint¬
ing other oaths, 3d and 4th William and Mary, c. 2. To this the
parliament convened at Dublin, Anno 1692, under Lord Sydney, and
that likewife, Anno, *695, under Lord Capel, paid an entire obedi¬
ence. And by this (his al-ledged) we have given up our right, if any
we had, and have for ever acknowledged our fubordination to the
parliament of England. But let us a little confider the force of this
argument.
I readily grant, that this and the other fore-mentioned a<5h in Engr
land fmee the Revolution, when they were made, were looked upon
highly in our favour, and for our benefit and to them as fuch, we
have conformed ourfelves. But then, in all juftice and equity, Our
fubmiliion herein is to be deemed purely voluntary, and not at all
proceeding from the right we conclude thereby in the legislators. If
a marl, who has no jurifdiction over me, command me to do a thing
that is pleafmg to me, arid I do it ; it will not thence follow, that
thereby he obtains an authority over me, and that ever hereafter I
mufl obey him of duty. If I voluntarily give my money to a man
when I pleafe, and think it convenient for me ; this d«es not autho¬
rize him at any time to command my money from me when he pleafes.
If it be faid, this allows fubje&s to obey only Whilft ’tis convenient
for them, i pray it may be conlidered, whether any men obey longer,
unlefs they be forced to it ; and whether they will not free themfelves
from this force as foon as they can. ’Tis impoffible to hinder men from
defiring to free themfelves from uneafmefs, ’tis a principle of nature,
and cannot be’ eradicated. If fubmitting to an inconvenience be a
lets evil than endeavouring to throw it off, men will fubmit. But if the
inconveniency grow upon them, and be greater than the hazard of
getting rid of it, men will offer at putting it by, let the hatefman or
divine fay what they can.
But 1 fha.ll yet go a {little further, and venture to aflert, that the
right of being lubject only to fuch laws to which men give their own
confent, is fo inherent to all mankind, and founded on fuch immuta¬
ble laws of nature and reafon, that ’tis not to be aliened, or given up,
by any body of men whatfoever : For the end of all government and
laws being the public good of the commonwealth, in the peace, tran¬
quillity and eafe of every member therein ; whatever aft is contrary
to this end, is in itfelf void, and of no effedt: And therefore for a
company of men to fay, Let us unite ourfelves into a fociety, and let
us be abiblutely governed by fuch laws, as fuch a legiflator, without
ever confulting us, (hall devife for us ; ’tis always to be underftood,
Provided we find them for our benefit : For to fay, We will be go¬
verned by thofe laws, whether they be good or hurtful to us, is ab-
ftird in itfelf : For to what end do men join in fociety, but to avpid.
hurt, and the inconveniencies of the ftate of nature ?
( 43 )
Moreover, I defire it may be confidered, whether the general ap¬
plication of the chief part of the frifh Proteftants, that were at that
time in London, to the parliament at Weftminfter, for obtaining thefe
laws, may not be taken for their confent, and on that account, and
iio other, thefe ads may acquire their binding force. I know very
well, this cannot be looked upon as a regular and formal confent,
fuch as might be rcquifite at another more favourable juncture : But
yet it may be taken talis qualis, as far as their circumitahces at that
time would allow, till a. more convenient opportunity might prcfeijt
itfelf.'
I am fure, if fome fuch confiderations as thefe, may not plead for us,
we are of all his Majefty’s fubjeds the moft unfortunate :• The rights
and liberties of the parliament of England have received the greateit
corroborations fince his Majefty’s accellion to the throne ; and To have
the rights of Scotland ; but the rights of the people of Ireland, on the
other hand, have received the greateft weakening under his reign, by
our fubmillion (as Tis ailedged) to thefe laws that have been made for
* , * . 1 V * » ■ -
US.
1 This certainly was not the defign of his Majefty’s glorious expedi¬
tion into thefe kingdoms : That, we are told by himfelf, (whom we
cannot poftibly miltruft) was to aftert the rights and liberties of thefe
nations : and we do humbly prefume that his Majefty will be graci-
oufly pleated to permit us to enjoy the benefits thereof.
i f • : t«> {. • . • : • • v
' The Opinions of the Lawyers thereon.
And thus I have done with the fourth article propofed. As to the
fifth, viz. The opinions of the learned in die laws relating to this mat¬
ter ; ’tis in a great mehfure difpatched by what I have offered on the
fourth head ; I lhall therefore" be the more brief thereon. And I
think indeed the Only perfon of note that remains to be confidered by
us, is the Lord Chief Juftice Coke, a name of great veneration with
the gentlemeq of the long robe, and therefore to be treated with all
refpett and deference. " ' ' ' " * -i J '
In his feventh report in Calvin’s cafe, he is proving that Ireland is a
dominion feplrate and divided from England ; for this he quotes many
authorities f but of the year-books and reports ; and amongft others,
he has that which I have before mentioned, pag. 35. 2 R. 3. S. 12.
which he tranfcribes in this manner, The ' Irifo have a parliament, and
make laws y arid our ft at rites do not bind them; bccaufe they do not fend Knights
to our parliament ; and then adds, in a parenthesis, (which is to be un~
derftood, unlefs they be fpecially named) but their perjons are the King?
Jab] efts , in the fame ?nanner as the inhabitants of Calais , Gafcoigney and
Guienne. The firft thing I fliall obferve hereon, is the very unfaithful
and broken citation of this paffage, as will manifeftly appear by com¬
paring it with the true tranfeript I have given thereof before, page 35.
Were this all, ’twerein fome meafure pardonable. But what cannot
be excufed, is the unwarrantable pofition in his parenthefis, without
the leaft colour or groun4 for it in his text. Herein he concludes
downright magifterially, So it muft be, this is my definitive fentence;
f 20 Hen . 6. 8. Pi iking! otis Cafe. 32 Hen. 6. 25. 20 Eliz. Dyer *
360. ploivd. Corn. 360. " >
( 44- )
as if his plain affertion, without any other reafon, ought to prevail ;
nay, even point-blank again ft the irrefragable reafon of the book lie
quotes. I confefs in another place of Calvin’s Cafe, viz. fob 17. b. he
gives this aflertipn a colour of reafon, by faying, That though Ireland
be a diftinft dominion from England, yet the title thereof being by
conqueft, the fame by judgment of law might by exprefs words be
bound by the parliaments of England. Plow far conqueft gives a title
we have enquired before: But I would fain know what Lord Coke
means by Judgment of Law: Whether he means the law of nature
and reafon, or of nations ; or the civil laws of our commonwealths ;
in none of which fenfes, I conceive, will he, or any man, be ever able
to make out his poiition.
Is the reafon of England’s parliament not binding Ireland, Becaufe we
do not fend thither reprefentatives? And is the efficacy of this reafon
taken ofF, by our being named in an Englifh aft ? Why fliould fending
reprefentatives to parliament, bind thofe that lend them ? Meerlv be-
caufe thereby the confent of thofe that are bound is obtained, as far
as thofe fort of meetings can poffibly permit ; which is the very foun¬
dation of the obligation of all laws. And is Ireland’s being named in
an Englifh ad of parliament, the leaft ftep towards obtaining the
confent of the people of Ireland ? If it be not, then certainly my
Lord Coke’s paremthefis is to no purpofe. And ’tis a wonder to me,
that fo many men have run upon this vain imagination, meerly from
the aftertion cf this Judge: For I challenge any man to fhew me, that
any one before him, or any one fince, but from him, lias vended this
■doctrine : And if the bare aftertion of a Judge, fha.il bind a whole
nation, and diffolve the rights and liberties thereof, we fhall make
their tongues very powerful, and ccnftitute them greater Jaw-givers
than the greateft fenates. 1 do not fee why my denying it, fhould not
be as authentic as his affirming it. ’Tis true, he was a great law¬
yer and a powerful Judge ; but had no more authority to make a law,
than 1 or any man elfe. But fome will fay, he was a learned Judge,
and may be fuppofed to have reafon for his pofftion. Why then does
he not give it us? And then what he alferts would prevail, not from
the authority of the perfon, but from the force of the reafon. The
fnoft learned in the laws have no more power to make or alter a con-
(litution, than any other man ; and their decifions fhall no farther pre¬
vail, than fuppqrted by reafon and equity. I conceive my Lord Chief
Juftice Coke applied himfelf fo wholly to the ftudy of the Common
Laws of England, that he did not enquire far into the law's of nature
and nations ; if he had, certainly he could never have been guilty of
fuch an erroneous flip ; he would have feen demonftrably, that confent
only gives human laws their force, and that therefore the reafon in
the c?de he quotes is unanfwerable, Becaufe they do not fend Knights to
parliament. Moreover, the aftertion of Coke in this point is direftly
contrary to the w'hole tenour of the cafe which he cites : For the very
aft of parliament, on which the debate of the Judges did arife, and
which they deemed not to be of force in Ireland, particularly names
Ireland. So that here again Lord Coke’^ error appears rood plainly.
For this I refer to the Report, as I have exaftly delivered it before, page
35. By which it appears clearly to be the unanimous opinion of all the
Judges then in the Exchequer Chamber; That within the land of Ire-
( 45 ' )
land, the parliaments of England have no jurifdiftion, whatever they-
may have over the iubjeds of Irelandon the open Teas : And the reafon
is given, Becaufe Ireland doth not fend Knights to parliament i?i England.
This afiertion likewife is inconfillent 'with himfelf in other parts of
his works. He tells us in his 4th Inft. pag. 349- That ’tis plain that
not only King John (as all men allow) but Henry II. alfo, the father of
King John, did ordain and command, at the inftance of the Iriftv
that fuch laws as had been in England fhouldbe obferved.and of force
in Ireland. Hereby Ireland being of itfelf, a diftinct dominion, and
110 part of the kingdom of England, was to have parliaments holder*
there as in England. And in pag. 12, he tells us, That He?iry II.
fent a Modus into Ireland, directing them how to hold their parlia¬
ments. But to what end was all this, if Ireland, ncvcrthelefs were fub-
jedt to the parliament of England ? The King and parliaments of thefe
kingdoms are fupreme legislators ; if Ireland be fubjedt to two (its
own, and tha tof England) it has two fupremes ; ’tis not impoffible,
but they may enadt different or contrary fandtions ; which of thefe fhall
the people obey? He tells us in Calvin’s cafe, fol. 17. b. That if a King
hath a Chrillian kingdom by conqueft, a<s Henry II. lrad Ireland, after
King John had given to them, being under his obedience, and fub-
jedtion, the laws of England for the government of that country, no
fucceeding King could alter the fame without parliament. Which,
by the way, feems diredlly contradictory to what he fays concerning
Ireland fix lines below this lafl cited paftage. So that we may oblerve
my Lord Coke enormoufly humbling at every turn in this point.
Opinions of other Judges, in favour of Ireland.
Thus I have done with this Reverend Judge ; and, in him, -with
the only pofitive opinion againft us. I fhall now conlider what our
law-books offer in our favour on this point.
To this purpofe we meet a cafe fully appofite, reported in the year¬
book of the 20th of Henry VL fol. S. between one John Pilkington
and one A.
Pilkingten’s Cafe .
Pilkington brought a Scire Facias againft A. to fhew caufe, why-
letters patents whereby -the King had granted an office in Ireland to
the faid A. fhould not be repealed, ftnee the faid Pilkington had the
fame office granted to him by former letters patents of the fame King
to be occupied by himfelf or his deputy. Whereupon A. pleaded,
that the land of Ireland, time out of memory, hath been a land- fepa-
rated and diftindl from the land of England, and ruled and governed
by the cuftoms of the fame land of Ireland. That the Lords of the
fame land, which are of the King’s council, have ufed from time to
time, in the abfence of the King, to eledt a Juftice, who hath power
to pardon and punifii all felonies, &c. and to call a parliament, and
by the advice of the Lords and Commonalty to make ftatutes. He
alledged further, that a parliament was aftembled, and that it was or¬
dained by the faid parliament, f that every man who had an. office
within the laid land, before a certain day, fhall occupy the faid office
by himfelf, ctherwile, he fhould forfeit. He fhewed that Pilking-
p This flatute vje ?nay reckon , among fi the number of thofe that are kji
during the long intervals of our Irifh ails, ?ioted before, to be about 11$
i ears .
(46)
ton occupied by a Deputy ; and that therefore his office was void,
arid that the King, had granted the faid office to him the faid
A. Hereupon Piikington demurred m law; and it was debat¬
ed by the Judges, Yelvbrton; Fortefcue, Portington, Markham,
and Afcough, whether the faid pfefeription in relation to the date and
government of Ireland; be good or void in law. Yelverton and Port¬
ington held tlie prefcriptiotl void. But Fortefcue, Markham, and Affi
cough held the prefeription good; and that the letters^ patent made
to A. were gtiod, and ought not to be repealed. And in this it was
agreed by Fortefcue arid Portington, that if a tentli or fifteenth be
granted by parliament in England, that, (hall riot bind Ireland, al¬
though the King fhould fend the lame ftatute into Ireland under his
great leal ; except they in Ireland will in their parliament approve it ;
Becaufe they have not any comiriandmerit by writ to come to the par¬
liament of England ; And this was not denied by Markham, Yelverton*
or Afcough.
Mcrc/icmis oj Waterford’/ Cafe.
The Merchants of Waterford’s Cafe, which I have obferved be¬
fore. p. 35. as reported in the year book of the 2d of Richard III.
fob n, 1 2. is notorious on our behalf, but needs not be here repeated.
Prior oj Lamhony’/ Cafe.
The Cafe of the Prior of Lanthony in Wales, mentioned by Mr.
Pryn againft the 4th Inft. ch. 76. p. 313. is ufually cited againft us*
But I conceive Vis fo far from proving this, that his very much in our
behalf. The cafe was briefly thus : 'The Prior of Lanthony brought
an action in the Common Pleas of Ireland againft the Prior of Mol-
lingar, for an arrear of an annuity, and judgment went againft the
Prior of Mollingar; hereon the Prior of Mollingar brought a Writ of
Error in the King’s-Bench of Ireland, and the judgment was affirmed.
Then the Prior of Mollingar appealed to the parliament in Ireland
held 5 Henry VI. before James Butler Earl of Ormond, and the par¬
liament reverfed both judgments. The Prior of Lanthony removed
all into the King’s-Bench in England ; but the King’s-Be-nch refuied
to intermeddle, as having no power over what had palled in the par¬
liament of Ireland. Hereupon the Prior of Lanthony appealed to the
Parliament of England. And it does not appear by the parliament
roll * that any thing was done on this appeal ; all that is entered being
only the petition iti'elf at the end of the Roll. Yid. Pryn againft the
4th Inft. chap. 76. p. 313.
Now whether this be a precedent proving the fubordination of our
Jrifti parliament to that of England, I leave the reader to judge:
To me it feems the clear contrary. For firft we may obferve, the
ICing’s-Bench in England abfolutely difclaiming any cognizance ot
what had puffed in the parliament of Ireland. And next we may ob*
ferve, that nothing at all was done therein upon the appeal to the
parliament of England : Certainly if the parliament of England had
thought themfelves to have a right to enquire into this matter, they
had fo done, one way or other, and not left the matter undetermined
Mid in fufpenfe.
* Rot. Park Aru 8. Hen. VI. in At.
( 47 )
Argument from nets of fuccejfion and recognition pajfed in Ireland,
It has ever been acknowledged that the kingdom of Ireland is infe-*
parably annexed to the imperial crown of England. The obligation
that our legiflature lies under by Poynings Adi, 10 Hen. VII. c. 4.
makes this tie between the two kingdoms indiftoluble. And we muft
ever own it our happinefa to be thus annexed to England : And that
the Kings and Queens of England are by undoubted right, ipfo fadto.
Kings and Queens of Ireland. And from hence we may reafonably
conclude, that if any adts of parliament made in England, fhould be
of force in Ireland, before they are received there in parliament,
they fhould be more efpecially fuch adts as relate to the fucceffion and
fettlement of the crown, and recognition of the King’s title thereto,
and the power and jurifdidtion' of the King. And yet we find in the
Irifh llatutes, 2S Henry VIII. c. 2. an Adt for the Succeftion of the
King and Queen Ann ; and another, chap. 5. declaring the King to
be fupreme head of the church of Ireland ; both which adts had for¬
merly palled in the parliament of England. So likewise we find
amongft the Irilh ftatutes adts of recognition of the King’s title to Ire¬
land, in the reigns of Henry VIII. Queen Elizabeth, King James,
King Charles II. King William and Queen Mary, by which it appears
that Ireland, though annexed to the crown of England, has always
been looked upon to be a kingdom compleat within itfelf, and to have
all jurifdidtion to an abfolute kingdom belonging, and fubordinate to
no legislative authority on earth. Though ’tis to be noted, thele Eng-
lilh adts relating to the fucceffion, and recognition of the King’s title,
do particularly name Ireland.
Ireland’^ State Ecclefiajlical independent .
As the civil hate of Ireland is thus abfolute within itfelf, fo likewtfe
is our State Ecclefiaftical : This is manifeft by the canons and conftitu-
tions, and even by the articles of the Church of Ireland, which differ
in Tome things from thofe of the Church of England. And in all the
charters and grants of liberties and immunities to Ireland, we ftill find
this, That Holy Church fhall be free, &c. I would fain know what
is meant here by the word free : Certainly if our church be free and
abfolute within itfelf, our ftate muft be fo likewife ; for how our civil
and ecclefiaftical government is now interwoven, every body knows.
But I will not enlarge on this head, it fuffices only to hint it; 1 Ihall
detain myfelf to our civil government.
Argument from a Record in Reyley.
Another argument againft the parliament of England’s jurifdidtion
over Ireland, I take from a record in Reyley’ s Placita Parliamentaria,
page 569. to this efFedt : 7- In the 14th of Edward II. the King fent
his letters patents to the Lord Juftice of Ireland, letting him know,
that he had been moved by his parliament at Weftminfter, that he
would give order that the Irifh natives of Ireland, might enjoy
the laws of England concerning life and member, in as large and
ample maimer as the Englifh of Ireland enjoyed the fame. This there¬
fore the King gives in commandment, and orders accordingly, by
thefe his letters patents. From hence, I fay, we may gather, that the
parliament of England did not then take upon them to have any ju-
f 14 Ed, II. Far, 2. Mtm. 21 Int.
... . ( 4* ) '
KfJiction in Ireland, (for then they would have made a law for Ice¬
land to this effeft) but inftead thereof, they apply to the King, that
he would interpole hid commands, and give direftions that this great
branch of the Common Law of England llrould be put in execution in
Ireland indifferently to all the King’s fubjefts there, purfuant to the
original compaft made with them On their firft fubmiffion to the
crown of England.
Objections dfaivn from a JVrit of Error.
Let iis now confider the great obje&ion drawn from a Writ of Er¬
ror's lying from the King’s-Be'nch of England, on a judgment given
in the King’s-Bench in Ireland ; which proves (as ’tis infilled on) that
there is a fubordination of Ireland to England j and that if an inferior
court of judicature in England, can thus take cognizance of, and over¬
rule the proceedings in the like court of Ireland ; it will follow, that
the lupreme court of parliament in England may do the fame, in re¬
lation to the proceedings of the court of parliament in Ireland.
it mufl be confelfed that this has been the conllant praftice ; and
it feems to be the great thing that induced my Lord Coke to believe
that an add of parliament in England, and mentioning or including
Ireland, ihould bind here. The fubordination of Ireland to England*
he lcems to infer from the fubordination of the King’s-Bench of Ire¬
land, to the King’s-Bench of England. But to this I anlwer :
1 . That ’tis the opinion of feveral learned in the laws of Ireland*
that this removal of a judgment from the King’s Bench of Ireland, by
Writ of Error, into the King’s Bench of England, is founded on an
aft of parliament in Ireland, which is loll: amongft a great number of
other adts, which we want for the fpace of 130 years at one time, and
120 at another time, as we have noted before. But it being only a
general tradition, that there was iu ch an aft of our parliament, we
only offer it as a furmife, the flatute itfelf docs not appear.
2. Where a judgment in Ireland is removed, to be reverfed in Eng¬
land, the Judges in England ought, and always do judge, according
to the laws and cuftoms of Ireland, and not according to the laws and
culloms of England, any otherwife than as thefe may be of force in
Ireland ; but if in any thing- the two laws differ, the law of Ireland
muff prevail, and guide their judgment. And therefore in the cafe of
one Kelly, removed to the King’s Bench in England, inUhe beginning
of King Charles I. one error was aifigned that the Praecipe wais of
woods and underwoods, which is a manifeft error, if brought in Eng¬
land.; but the Judges finding the ufe to be otherwife in Ireland, judg¬
ed it no error. So in Crook, Charles, fol. 51 1. Mulcarry verf. Eyres.
Error was affigned, for that the declaration was of one hundred acres
of bog, which is a word not known in England ; but ’twas laid, it
was well enough underffood in Ireland, and lb adjudged no error.
From whence, I conceive, ’tis manifeft, that the jurifdiftion of the
King’s Bench in England, over a judgment in the King’s Bench of
Ireland, does not proceed from any fubordination of one kingdom to
the other; but from fome other reafon, which we llia.ll endeavour to
make out.
3. We have before obferved, that in the reign of King Henry III.
Gerald Fitz Maurice, Lord Juftice of Ireland, lent four Knights to
-know what was held for law in England in the cafe of Coparceners.
( +9 )
The occafion of which me{Tage (as before we have noted out of th®
King’s Refcript) was, becaufe the King’s Juftice of Ireland was ignorant:
what the law was. We may reafonably imagine that there were many
meflages of this kind ; for in the infancy of the Englifn government,
it may well be fuppofed, that the Judges in Ireland were not fo deep¬
ly verfed in the laws of England : This occafioned meffages to Eng¬
land, before judgment given in Ireland, to be informed of the law.
And after decrees made, perfons who thought themfelves aggrieved
by erroneous judgments, applied themfelves to the King in England
for redrefs. Thus it mud be, that Writs of Error (unlefs they had
their fan&ion in parliament) became in ufe. Complaints to the King
by thofe that thought themfelves injured, incteafed ; and at lad grew
into cudom, and obtained the force of law.
Perhaps it may be objected, that if the Judges of the King’s Bench
in England ought to regulate their judgment by the cudoms of Ire¬
land, and not of England, it will follow, that this original which we
affign of Writs of Error to England, is not right.
I anfwer, that this may be the primary original, and yet conhd
well enough with what we have before laid down : For though the
Common Law of England was to be the Common Law of Ireland,
and Ireland at the beginning of its Englifh government might fre¬
quently fend into England to be informed about it ; yet this does noC
hinder, but Ireland, in a long procefs of time, may have feme fmalier
cudoms and laws of its own, gradually but infenfibly crept into prac¬
tice, that may in fome meafure differ from the cudoms and pra&ice
of England ; and where there is any fuch, the Judges of England
mud regulate their fentence accordingly, though the irrft rife of Writ3
of Error to England, may be as we have here fuguefted; In like man¬
ner, where the Statute-law of Ireland differs from that of England,
the Judges of England will regulate their judgments by the Statute-
law of Ireland : This is the condant pra&ice, and notorioufly known
in Wedminder-Hall : From which it appears, that removing a judg¬
ment from the King’s Bench of Ireland, to the King’s Bench of Eng¬
land, is but an Appeal to the King in his Bench of England, for his
fenfe, judgment, or expofition of the laws of Ireland. But of this
more hereafter.
4. When a Writ of Error is Returned into the King’s Bench of Eng¬
land, fuit is made to the King only ; the matter lies altogether before
him ; and the party complaining applies to no part of the political
government of England for redrefs, but to the King of Ireland only,
who is in England : That the King only is fued to, our law-books
make plain. This court is called the Court of our Lord the King , and
the King's Court , becaufe the King ufed to fit there in perfon, as Lam-
bard tells us ; and every caufe brought there, is faid to be before our
Lord the King , even at this very day, Coke 4 Ind. p. 72. Therefore
if a writ be returnable before us> wherever we Jhall be , ’tis to be re¬
turned to the King’s Bench. But if it be returnable before our Judges
at lVeflminJlert ’tis to be returned into the Common Pleas. This Codrt
(as Glanvil and other ancients tell us) ufed to travel with the King,
wherever he went. And Fleta, in deferibing this Court, fays, The
King hath his own Court and his own Judges , before whom, and no where
( 5° )
ilfet except before himfelf, t£c. falfe judgments are to be returned and
corrected. The King then (as Britton fays) having fupreme jurifdieHon
in his realm, to judge in all caufes whatfoever ; therefore it is, that
erroneous judgments were brought to him out of Ireland. But this
does not argue that Ireland is therefore fubordinate to England $• for
the people of Ireland are the fubjedts of the King to whom they ap¬
peal. And ’tis not from the country where the court is held, but from
the prefence and authority of the King (to whom the people of Ire¬
land have as good a tide as the people of England) that the pre-emi¬
nence of the jurifdidtion does flow. And I queftion not, but in for¬
mer times, when thefe courts were firft erected, and when the King
exerted a greater power in judicature than he does now, and he ufed
to fit in his own court, that if he had travelled into Ireland, and the :
court had followed him thither ; erroneous judgments might have j
been removed from England before him into his court in Ireland ; for 1
fo certainly it muft be, fince the court travelled with the King. From
hence it appears, that all the jurifdidtion, that the King’s Bench in 1
England, has over the King’s Bench in Ireland, arifes only from the
King’s prefence in the former. And the fame may be faid of the
Chancery in England, if it will alTume any power to control the
Chancery in Ireland ; becaufe (as Lambard fays, p. 69, 70.) the Chan¬
cery did follow the King, as the King’s-Bench did ; and that, as he
tells us out of the Lord Chief Jullice Scroope, the Chancery and the
King’s-Bench were once but one place. But if this be the ground of
the jurifdidtion of the King’s-Bench in England over the King’s-
Bench in Ireland, (as I am fully perfuaded it is) the parliament in
England cannot from hence claim any right of jurifdidtion in Ireland,
becaufe they claim a jurifdidtion of their own ; and their court is not
the King’s-court, in that proper and ftridt fenfe that the KingV
Bench is.
But granting that the fubordination of the King’-Bench in Ireland,
to the King’s- Bench in England, be rightly concluded from a Writ of
Error out of the latter, lying on a judgment in the former j I fee no
reafon from thence to conclude, that therefore the parliament of Ire¬
land is fubordinate to the parliament in England, unlefs we make any
one fort of fubordination, or in any one part of jurifdidtion, to be a
fubordination in all points, and all parts of jurifdidtion. The fubjedts
of Ireland may appeal to the King in his Bench in England, for the
expounding of the old common and ftatute law of Ireland ; will it
therefore follow that the parliament of England fhall make new laws
to bind the fubjedts in Ireland ? I fee no manner of confeqiience in it ;
unlefs we take expounding old laws, (or laws already made) in the
King’s-Bench, and making new laws in parliament, to be one and the
fame thing. I believe the beft logician in Europe will hardly make a
chain of fyllogifms, that from fuch premifes, will regularly induce
fuch a conclufion.
To clofe this point, we find that a judgment of the King’s-Bench in
Ireland, may be removed by a Writ of Error to the parliament in
Ireland : But the judgment of the parliament of Ireland wras never
queftioned in the parliament of England. This appears from the
Prior of Lantliony’s cafe aforegoing.
( S' )
Declaration in the Irifh. ASl of Faculties .
I flia.ll conclude this our fifth article with a memorable pafTage out
bf our Irifh ftatutes, which leems to {Lengthen what we have deliver¬
ed on the bufmefs of a Writ of Error, as well as the chief doctrine
I drive at ; and that is 28 Henry VIII. chap. 19. The Act bf Facul¬
ties. This ftatute is a recital at large of the Englilh A<5t of the 25
Henry VIII. c. 21. In the preamble of which Englilh A ft ’tis de¬
clared, That this your Grace’s realm recognising no fuperior but
your Grace, hath been and yet is free from any fubje&ion to any
man’s laws, but only fuch as have been devifed within this realm, for
the wealth of the fame, or to fuch others, as by fufferance of your
Grace and your progenitors, the people of the realm have taken at
their free liberties by their own conferit ; and have bound themfelves
by long life and cuftom to the obfervance of, &c.”
This declaration, with the other claufes of tbe faid Englifh Aft, is
Verbatim recited in the Irifh A£t of Faculties ; and in the faid Irifh
A& it is enacted, That the faid Englilh Aft, and every thing and
things therein, contained, lhall be eftablifbed, affirmed, taken, obeyed
and accepted within this land of Ireland as a good and perfect law,
and fhall be within the faid land of the fame force, effeft, quality,
condition, (Length and virtue, to all purpofes and intents, as it is
within the realm of England ; (if fo, then the faid claufe declares
ouf right of being bound only by laws to which we confent, as it
does the right of the people of England) and that all fubjefts within '
the faid land of Ireland, lhall enjoy the profit and commodity thereof,
in like manner as the Ring’s fubjefls of the realm of England.
Farther redfons offered in behalj of Ireland.
I am now arrived at our fixth and laft article propofed, viz. The
realons and arguments that may be farther offered on one fide and
the other in this debate.
England’/ title to Ireland by pur chafe,
1 have before taken notice of the title England pretends over us
from conqueft : I have likewife enquired into the precedents on one
fide and the other, from adds of parliament, from records, and from
reports of the learned in the laws. There remains another pretence
or two for this fubordination, to be confidered ; and one is founded
on purchafe.
’Tis faid, that vafl quantity of treafure, that from time to time has
been fpent by England in reducing the rebellions and carrying on the
wars of Ireland, has given them a juft title at leaft to the lands and
inheritances of the rebels, and to the abfolute drfpolal thereof in their
parliament ; and as particular examples of this, we are told of the
great fums advanced by England for fupprefTmg the rebellion of the
irifh Papifts in 1641, and oppoling the late rebellion fince King WIL¬
LIAM’S acceffion to the throne.
To this I anfvver, That in a war there is all reafon imaginable that
the eftates of the unjuft oppofers fhould go to repair the damage that
is done. This I have briefly hinted before. J3ut if wc confider the
( 5* )
wars of Ireland we (hall perceive they do not refemble the common cafe
of wars between two foreign enemies ; ours are rather rebellions, or
inteftine commotions } that is, the Irifh Papifts rifmg againft the King
and Proteftants of Ireland ; and then ’tis plain, that if thefe latter,
by the affiftance of their brethren of England, and their purfe, do
prove victorious, the people of England ought to be fully repaid :
But then the manner of their payment, and in what way it fhall be
levied, ought to be left to the people of Ireland in parliament affem-
bled : And fo it was pfter the rebellion of 1641. The adventurer then
were at vaft charges, and there were feveral aCts of parliament in
England made for their re-imburfmg, by difpofmg to them the rebels
lands. But after all, it was thought reafonable that the parliament of
Ireland fhould do this in their own way ; and therefore the A<5ts of
Settlement and Explanation, made all the former Englifh a<fts of no
force ; or at leaft did very much alter them in many particulars, as
we have noted before. In like manner we allow that England ought
to be repaid all their expences in fuppreffing this late rebellion : All we
defire is, that, in prefervation of our own rights and liberties, we
may do it in our own methods regularly in our own parliament : And
if the re-imburfement be all that England Hands upon, what availeth
it whether it be done this way or that way, fo it be done ? We have
an example of this in point between England and Holland in the glo¬
rious revolution under his prefent Majefty : Holland in affifting Eng¬
land expended 600,000/. and the Englifh parliament fairly repaid
them. It would have looked oddly for Holland to have infilled on
difpofmg of Lord Powis’s and other ellates, by their own laws, to
re-imburfe themfelves.
’Tis an ungenerous thing to vilify good offices, I am far from doing
it, but with all poffible gratitude acknowledge the mighty benefits
Ireland has often received from England, in helping to fupprefs the
rebellions of this country ; to England’s affiftance our lives and
fortunes are owing : But with all humble fubmiffion, I defire it may
be confidered, whether England did not at the fame time propofe the
prevention of their own danger, that would necelfarily have attended
our ruin ; if fo, it was in fome meafure their own battles they fought,
when they fought for Ireland ; and a great part of their expence mull
be reckoned in their own defence.
Objefl. Ireland prejudicial to England’/ trade , therefore to be
bound.
Another thing alleged againft Ireland is this : If a foreign nation,
as France or Spain for inftance, prove prejudicial to England, in its
trade, or any other way ; England, if it be ftronger, redreffes itfelf
by force of arms, or denouncing war ; and why may not England, if
Ireland lies crofs their interefts, reftrain Ireland, and bind it by laws,
and maintain thefe laws by force ?
To this I anfwer : Firft, that it will hardly be inftanced, that any
nation ever declared war with another, merely for over-topping them
in fome (ignal advantage, which otherwife, or but for their endea¬
vours, they might have reaped. War only is juftifiable for injuftice
done, or violence offered, or rights detained. I cannot by the law of
nations. Quarrel with a man, hecaufe he. going before me in the road.
( 53 )
finds a piece of gold, which poffibly, if he had not taken it up, I
might have light upon and gotten* ’Tis true, we often fee wars com¬
menced on this account under-hand, and on emulation in trade and
riches ; but then this is never made the open pretence, fome other co¬
lour it muft receive, or elfe it would not look fair ; which fhews plainly,
that this pretence of being prejudicial, or of reaping advantages
which otherwife you might partake of, is not juftifiable in itfelf. But
granting that it were a good j unification of a war with a foreign na¬
tion, it will make nothing in the cafe between England and Ireland ;
for if it did, why does it not operate in the fame manner between
England and Scotland, and confequently in like manner draw after it
England’s binding Scotland by their laws at Weftminfter : We are all
the fame King’s fubjedts, the children of one common parent ; and
though we may have our diftindt rights and inheritances abfolutely
within ourfelves ; yet we ought not, when thefe do chance a little to
interfere to the prejudice of one or the other fide, immediately to
treat one another as enemies , fair amicable propofitions fhould be pro*
pofed, and when thefe are not hearkened to, then it is time enough to
be at enmity, and ufe force.
Objefl. Ireland a Colony .
The laft thing I fhall take notice of, that fome raife againfl us, is,
that Ireland is to be looked upon only as a colony from England : And
therefore as the Roman colonies were fubjedt to, and bound by, the
laws made by the fenate at Rome ; fo ought Ireland by thofe made by
the great council at Weftminfter. Of all the objections raifed againft
us, I take this to be the moft extravagant; it feems not to have the
leaft foundation or colour from reafon or record : Does it not manifeft-
ly appear by the conftitution of Ireland, that it is a compleat king¬
dom within itfelf? Do not the Kings of England bear the ftile of Ire¬
land amongft the reft of their kingdoms ? Is this agreeable to the na¬
ture of a colony? Do they ufe the title of Kings of Virginia, New-
England, or Maryland ? Was not Ireland given by Henry II. in a par¬
liament at Oxford to his fon John, and made thereby an abfolute
kingdom, feparate and wholly independent on England, till they both
came united again in him, after the death of his brother Richard
without iflue ? Have not multitudes of adts of parliament both in
England and Ireland, declared Ireland a compleat Kingdom ? Is not
Ireland ftiled in them all, the kingdom, or realm of Ireland ? Do thefe
names agree to a colony ? Have we not a parliament, and courts of
judicature ? Do thefe things agree with a colony ? This on all hands
involves fo many abfurdities, that I think it delerves nothing more of
our confideration.
Thefe being the only remaining arguments that are fometimes men*
tioned againft us, I now proceed to offer what I humbly conceive de~
monftratesthe juftice of ourcaufe.
And herein I muft beg the reader’s patience, if now and then I am
forced lightly to touch upon fome particulars foregoing. I fhall en¬
deavour all I can to avoid prolix repetitions ; but my fubjedt requires
that fometimes I juft mention, or refer to, feveral notes before de¬
livered.
( 54 )
Firft, therefore, 1 fay, That Ireland flsould be bound by a els of
parliament made in England, is againft reafon, and the common
rights of all mankind.
Againf the rights of Mankind.
All men are by nature in a date of equality, in refpedt of jurif-
didtion or dominion : 'This 1 take to be a principle in itielf fo evident,
that it hands in need of little proof. It is not to be conceived, that
creatures of the fame fpecies and rank, promilcuouily born to all the
fame advantages of nature, and the ufe of the fame faculties, fhould
be lubordinate and fubjedt one to another ; thefe to this or that of the
fame kind. On this equality in nature is founded that right which all
men claim, of being free from all fubjedtion to pofitive laws, till by
their own confent they give up their freedom, by entering into civil
focieties for the common benefit of all the members thereof.
Confent only gives law force.
And on this confent depends the obligation of all human laws; in-
fomuch that without it, by the unanimous opinion of all jurids, no
fandtions are of any force. For this let us appeal, amongll many,
only to the judicious Mr. Hooker’s Ecclef. Polity, book 1. feet. to.
Lond. Edit. ^676. Thus he :
“ Howbeit, laws do not take their conftraining force from the qua-
i( Jity o^ luch as devife them, but from that power which doth give
“ them the ftrength of laws. That which we fpeak before, concern-
“ ing the power of government, mull here be applied to the power of
making laws whereby to govern, which power God hath over all;
u and by the natural law, whereunto he hath made all fubjedl, the
<c lawful power of making law’s, to command w'hole politic focieties of
<i men, belongeth fo properly unto the fame entire focieties, that for
“ any Prince pr Potentate, of what kind foever upon earth, to exer-
“ cife the fame of himfelf, and not either by exprefs commiffion im-
mediately and perfonally received from God, or elfe by authority
(i derived at the fird from their confent, upon whofe perfons they im- 7
u pofe law’s, it is no better than mere tyranny. Laws they are not
“ therefore, which public >ip probation hath not made fo: But ap-
cc probation not only they give, who perfonally declare their aflent
<( by voice, fign, or adt ; but alfo w'hen others do it in their names,
“ by right originally, at the lead, deprived from them : As in Parlia-'
6S ments, Councils, &c.”
Again, “ Such men naturally have no full and perfedt power to
t( command wdiole politic multitudes of men; therefore utterly without
“ our confent, we could in fuch fort be at no man’s commandment
“ living. And to be commanded wre do confent, when that fociety
<l whereof we arc part, hath at any time before confented, without
“ revoking the fame after by the like univerfal agreement. Where-
il fore as any man’s deed pad is good, as long as himfelf continueth,
“ fo the adt of a public fociety of men, done five hundred years fince,
“ ftandeth as theirs who prefently are of the fame focieties, be-
t( caufe corporations are immortal ; we were then alive in our pre-
“ decelfors, and they in their fucceiTors do dill live. Laws therefore
“ human ol what kind foever, arc available by confent, &c. ’
( S 5 )
And again, M But wliat matter the law of nations doth contain, I
4< omit to fcarch ; the ftrength and virtue of that law is fuch, that no
“ particular nation can lawfully prejudice the fame by any their feve-
“ ral lawsvand ordinances, more than a man by his private refclutions
*‘ the law of the whole commonwealth or ftate wherein he liveth ;
" for as civil law being the aft of a whole body politic, doth there-
“ fore over-rule each civil part of the fame body ; lb there is no rea- -
tl fon that any one commonwealth of itfelf, lhould to the prejudice of
“ another, annihilate that whereupon the whole world hath agreed.”
To the fame purpofe may we find the univerfal agreement of all
Civilians, Grotius, Puffendcrf, Locke on Government, &c.”
No one or more men, can by nature challenge any right, liberty or
freedom, or any eafe in his property, efiate or confidence, which all
other men have not an equally juft claim to. Is England a free peo¬
ple ? So ought France to be. Is Poland fo ? Turkey likewife, and
all the Eaftern dominions, ought to be fo : And the fame runs through¬
out the -whole race of mankind,
Againfl the Common Law of England.
Secondly, ’Tis againft the common laws of England, which are
of force both in England and Ireland, by the original compact before
hinted. It is declared by both houfes of the parliament of England,
i Jac, cap. i , “ That in the High Court of Parliament, all the whole
“ body of the realm, and every particular member thereof,- either in
il perfon, or by reprefentation (upon, them own free elections) are by
“ the laws of this realm deemed to be perfonally prefent.” Is this
then the common law of England, and the birth-right of every free¬
born Englilh fubjeft ? And {ball we of this kingdom be denied it, by
having laws impofed on us, where we are. neither perfonally, nor re-
prefentatively prefent ? My Lord Coke in his 4th Inft. cap. 1. faith,
“ That all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and all the Commons
of the whole realm, ought of right to be fummoned to parliament,
and none of them ought to be omitted.” Hence it is called General
Council, in the Stat. of Weftminft. 1. and Common Council becaufe
it is to comprehend all perfonss and eftates in the whole kingdom.
And this is the very reafon given in the cafe of the Merchants of
Wateiford foregoing, why ftatutes made in England, fhould not bind
them in Ireland, becaufe they have not Knights in Parliament here. My
Lord Hobbard, in the cafe of Savage, and Day, pronounced it for law,
that whatever is againft natural equity and reafon, is againft law-; nay,
if an aft of parliament were made againft natural equity and reafon,
that aft was void. Whether it be not againft equity and reafon, that
a kingdom regulated within itfelf, and having its own parliament,
lhould be bound without, their confent, by the parliament of another
kingdom, I leave the reader to confider. My Lord Coke likewife in
the firft part of his Inftitutes, fol, 97. b. faith, Nothing can have the force
of law, that is contrary to reafon . And in the old Modus Tenendi Par-
liamenta of England, faid to be writ about Edward the Confeflar’s
time, and to have been confirmed and approved by William the Con¬
queror: It is exprefsly declared, That all the Lords Spiritual and
Temporal, and the Knights, Citizens, and Burgefles ought to be fum-
moned to parliament. The very fame is in the Modus fent into Ires
{ S6 )
land by Henry II. And in King John’s great Charter, dated 17 Jo-
hannis, ’tis granted in thcfe words, And in order to the holding of a
Common Council of the kingdom for fettling Aids and Knights feryices, ive
•will caufe the Arckbijhops , Bijhops , Abbots , Earls , and greater Barons of
the kingdom to be particularly jummoned by our writ, and 'we will caufe all
ethers to be fummoned in general by the Sheriffs. All are to be Summoned
to parliament, the Nobility by fpecial writs ; the Commons by general
writs to the Sheriffs. And is this the Common Law of England?
Is this part of thole free cufioms that were contained in the great Char¬
ter of the liberties of the people of England ; and were fo folemnly
granted by Henry If King John, and Henry III. to the people of Ire¬
land, that they fhonld enjoy and be governed by; and unto which
they were fworn to be obedient ; and {hall they be of force only in
England and not in Ireland ? Shall Ireland receive thefe charters of
liberties, and be no partakers of the freedoms therein contained ? Or
do thefe words fignify in England one thing, and in Ireland no fuch
thing ? This is fo repugnant to all natural reafon and equity, that I
hope no rational man will conteft it : I am fure if it be fo, there is an
end ox all fpeech amongft men ; all compacts, agreements, and focie-
ties, are to no purpofe.
Againfl the Statute Law both of England and Ireland.
3dly. It is again!! the ftatute laws both of England, and Ireland ;
This has been pretty fully difeuffed before ; however I (hall here again
notice, that * in the loth of Henry IV. It was enabled in Ireland,
that ftatutes made in England fhould not be of force in Ireland, un-
lefs they were allowed and puhlifhed by the parliament of Ireland.
And the like datute was made the 29th of Hery VI. And in the 10th
year of Henry VII. chap. 23. Irifh ilatutes, the parliament which was
held at Drogheda, before Sir Chnftopher Prefton, Deputy to Jafper
Duke of Bedford, Lieutenant of Ireland, was declared void, for this
reafon among il others, That there was no general fummons of the
laid parliament to ail the (hires, but only to four. And if adts of par¬
liament made in Ireland fhall not bind that people, becaufe l'ome coun¬
ties were omitted: how much lefs fhall cither their perfons or eftates
be bound by thofe adts made in England, whereat no one county, or
perfon of that kingdom, is prefent ? in the § 25th of Edward I. cap.
6. It was enacted by the parliament of England in thefe words,
Moreover from henceforth we fhall take no manner of aid, taxes, or
“ prizes, but by the common affent of the realm.” And again iq
the Statute of Liberties, by the fame King, cap. 1. De Ta/Iag. yion con -
cedend it is enacted in thefe words, f “ No tallage or aid fhall betaken
t( or levied by us, or our heirs, in our realm, without the good will
“ and affent. of Archbifhops, Bifhops, Earls, Barons, Knights, Bur-
“ gefies, and other Freemen of the land.’’ The like liberties are fpe-
cially confirmed to the clergy, J the 14th of Edward III. And were
thefe ftatutes, and all other ftatutes and adts of the parliament of
England ratified, confirmed, and adjudged by feveral parliaments of
Ireland tp be of force within this realm : And (hall the people of Ire-
§ Pulton's Col. Eng. St at. Edit, l^o^pags 63.
t Ibid, page 1 1 3.
* See before »
*}■ Ibid, page 75.
( 57 )
land receive no 'benefit by thofe adts ? Are thofe flatutes of force iA
England only; and can they add no immunity or privilege to the king¬
dom of Ireland when they are received there? Can the King and par¬
liament make acts in England to bind his fubjecls of Ireland without their
confent; and can he make no adls in Ireland with their confent, whereby
they may receive any privilege or immunity ? This were to make
the parliaments of Ireland wholly illufory, and of no effedh If this
be reafonable dodh'ine, to what end was Poynings law in Ireland, f
that makes all the ftatutes of England before that, in force in this
kingdom ? This might as well have been done, and again undone,
when they pleafe, by a fmgle adt of the Englifh parliament. But let
us not make thus light of conflitutions of kingdoms, his dangerous to
thofe who do it, ’tis grievous to thofe that luffer it.
Moreover, had the King or his council of England, in the loth
year of Henry VII. in the lead dreamt of this dodtrine, to what end
was all that If rift provifion made by Poynings Adi, Irifh Stat. cap. -4.
That no adt of parliament fhould pafs in Ireland, before it was firfi
certified by the chief Governour and Privy Council here, under the
broad feal of this kingdom, to the King and his Privy Council in Eng¬
land, and received their approbation, and by them be remitted hither
under the broad feal of England, here to be paffed into a law ? The
defign of this adt, feems to be the prevention of any thing pafiing in
the parliament of Ireland furreptitioufly, to the prejudice of the King,
or the Englifh interefl of Ireland. But this was a needlefs caution, if
the King, and parliament of England, had power at any time to re¬
voke or annul any fuch proceedings. Upon this adt of Poynings,
many and various acts have pafTed in Ireland, relating to the explana¬
tion, fpfpenfion, or farther corroboration thereof, in divers parlia¬
ments, both in Henry VIIps, Phil, and Mary’s, and Q. Eliz. reigns ;
for which fee the Irifh Statutes f. All which fhew that this dodtrine
was hardly fo much as furmifed in thofe days, however we come to
have it railed in thefe latter times.
Againft federal cancejjions made to Ireland.
Fourthly, ’Tis againlt feveral Charters of Liberties granted unto the
kingdom of Ireland : This likewiie is clearly made out by what fore¬
goes. I fhall only add in this place, that in the Patent roll of the 17
Rich. II. m. 34. de Confirmations , there is a confirmation of feveral li¬
berties and immunities granted unto the kingdom and people of Ire¬
land by Edward III. The patent is fomewhat long, but l'o much as
concerns this particular, I lhall render verbatim, as I have it tran-
fcribed from the Roll by Sir William Domville, Attorney General in.
Ireland during the whole reign of King Charles II. ‘The King , Sc c.
greeting . We have conftdered the Letters Patents of Edward our grandfa¬
ther , lately King of England , in thefe words : “ Edward by the Grace of
God, King of England , and E ranee, and Lord of Ireland , to the Arch -r
bijhops , Bifops, Abbots, Priors , our Minijlers both of higher and of lower
rank , and to all our faithful fubjefts of the land of Ireland to whom thefe
prefents fhall come greeting. — We have thought if good that the following
f jo Hen. VII, c. 22. J 28 //. VIII. c. 4. 28 H. VIII. c.
20. 3 <b 4. Phil . <& Mary,c . 4. 1 1 Eliz. fef 2. c. 1. 11 Eliz. fef 3. c. 8.
( J8 ) . . .
things he ordained and flrittly ohferved , <&c. to wit, Firf, we will and
command , that our holy I rijh Church have her own liberties and free cnjloms
unimpaired , and that foe uf and enjoy them without reftraint. Item , Ure
will and command that our bufinefs, and that of the land itfelf efpecially the
greatef and mofl difficulty be managed , explained, faithfully difcuffed, and
alfo determined without the influence of fear, favoury hatredy or rewar dy
in Councils, by our Jkilful Councilors and Prelates, and Grandees , and
fonie of the mojl difcreet and upright men, to be convened for this purpcft
from the neighbourhood oj the places where it Jhall happen that fuch Councils
Jhallbe held ; and in Parliaments, by our faid Counfellors and Prelates and
Nobles, and others of the aforefaid land, as life requires, according to jufice,
law, cufom and reafon , 6<r. In Tefimony whereof we have caufed thefe
our letters to be made patent. Witnefs our [elf at JVeJhuinfier, the d^th Day
of October, in the 3 1 ft year of our reign in England , and 1 3 th in France! *
Now we accounting the aforefaid appointments, ordinances and commands,
and all and fingular the things contained in the above recited letters , as being
already efablijhed and right , do for ourfe'ves and our heirs , to the utniofl of
our power, accept , approve, ratify and. confirm the fame, as the aforefaid
letters do fully f;ew. In tefimony whereof, witnefs the King at Wefmin -
far, on the 26 th of June,
, Inconfflent with the royalties of a kingdom .
Fifthly, It is inconfident with the royalties and pre-eminence of a
feparate and didintft kingdom. That we are thus a diftinct kingdom,
has been clearly made out before. ’Tis plain, the Nobility of Ire¬
land are an order of peers clearly didind from the peerage of*
England, the privileges of the one extend not into the other
kingdom ; a Lord of Ireland rpay be arreded by his body in.
England, and fo may a Lord of England in Ireland, whilft their
perfons remain facred in their refpe&ive kingdoms : A Voyage
Royal may be made into Ireland, as the Year-book, 11 Henry IV. 17.
fol. 7. and Lord Coke tells us ; and King John in the 12th year of his
reign of England, made a Voyage Royal into Ireland ; and all his te-
nants in chief, which did not attend him in that voyage, did pay him
Efcuage, at the rate of two marks for every Knight’s fee ; ■which was
impofed upon the Prelates and Barons for the King’s paffiage into Ireland,
as appears by the Pipe-Roll, Scutag. 12 th of King John in the Exchequer
of England. Which fhewsthat we are a complete kingdom within our-
felves, and not little better than a province, as fome are fo extravagant
as to alfert ; none of the properties of a Roman province agreeing iiy
the lead with our conftitution. ’Tis refolved in Sir Richard Pem-
brough’s Cafe in the 44th of Edward III. that Sir Richard might
lawfully refufe the King, to ferve him as his Deputy in Ireland, and,
that the King could not compel him thereto, for that were to ban.ilh,
him into another kingdom, which i§. againft Magna Charta, chap. 29.
Nay, even tho’ Sir Richard had great tenures from the King, far fer -
vice done and to be done, for that was faid mud be under flood \yith.in the
realm of England, Coke’s 2d Ind. page 47. And in Pilkington’s
Cafe aforementioned* Fartefcue declared, that the land of Ireland is
and at all times hath been a dominion feparate and divided from
England. Plow then can the realms of England and Ireland, being
didind kingdoms and feparate dominions; be imagined to have any iivv
( 59 )
pcrioritv or jurifdi&ion the one over the other ? Tis abfurd to fancy
that kingdoms are feparate and diftindt meerly from the geographical
diftin&ion ol territories. Kingdoms become diftinct by diftinit jurif-
di&iciis, and authorities legiflative and executive ; and as He is a
King who has\ no King , Jo that is a kingdom which is not fnbjett to ano¬
ther kingdom. A kingdom can have no fupreme; his in itfelf fupreme
within itfelf, and muft have all jurifdiftions, authorities and pre-emi-
nencies to the royal date of a kingdom belonging, or elfe ’tis none;
And that Ireland has all thefe, is declared in the Irifti Stat. 33 Henry
VIII. c. 1. The chief of thefe mod certainly is, the power of making
gnd abrogating its own laws, and being bound only by fucli to which
the community have given their confent.
Againfi the King s prerogative.
Sixthly, It is againft the King’s prerogative, that the parliament
of England Ihould have any co-ordinate power with him, to introduce
new laws, or repeal old laws eftablifhed in Ireland. By the conftitu-
tionof Ireland under Poynings Act, the Ring’s prerogative in the le-
gillature is advanced to a much higher pitch than ever was challenged
by the Kings in England, and the parliament of Ireland hands almoll
on the fame bottom as the King does in England ; I fay almoll on the
fame bottom, for the Irilh parliament have not only a negative vote (as
the King has in England) to whatever laws the King and his Privy
Councils of both or either kingdom fhall lay before them j but have
alfo a liberty of proposing to the King and his Privy Council here,
fuch laws as the parliament of Ireland think expedient to be palled.
Which laws being thus propofed to the King, and put into form, and
tranfmitted to the parliament here, according to Poynings A61, mull
be pahed or reje<5ledin the very words, even to a tittle, as they are laid
before our parliament, we cannot alter the lealt ipta. It therefore
the legiflatiire of Ireland hand on this foot, in relation to the King,
and to the parliament of Ireland ; and the parliament of England do
remove it from this bottom, and aftlime it to themfelves, where the
King’s prerogative is much narrower, and as it were reverfed, (for
there the King has only a negative vote) I humbly conceive ’tis in-
croachment on the King’s prerogative ; But this I am fure, the par¬
liament of England will be always very tender oi, and his Majeliy
will be very loath to have fuch a precious jewel of his crown handled
ruffly ; The happinefs of our conllitutions depending pn a right tem¬
perament between the King’s and the people’s rights.
Againfi the pradiice of former ages.
Seventhly, It is againft the practice of all former ages. Wherein
can it appear, that any ftatute made in England, was at any time fmee^
the reign of Henry III. allowed and put in pra&ice in the realm ot
Ireland, without the authority of the parliament ot Ireland. Is it not
manifeft by what foregoes, that from the twentieth of King Henry
III. to the thirteenth of Edward II. and from thence to the eighteenth
of Henry VI. and from thence to the thirty-fecond of Henry VI. and
from thence to the eighth of Edward IV. and from thence to the tenth
of Henry VII. there was fpecial care taken to introduce the ftatutes or
England, (fuch of them as were riecefTary or convenient for this king-
( 6° )
dom) by degrees, and always with allowance, and confent of the par¬
liament and people of Ireland. And fince the general allowance, of
all the Englifh ads and ftatates in the ioth of Henry VII. there have
feveral acts of parliament, which were made in England in the reigns
©f all the Kings from that time fuccefilvely to this very day, been
particularly received by parliament in Ireland, and fo they become of
force here, and not by reafon of any general comprehend ve words,
as lome men have lately fancied. For if by general comprchenfive
words the kingdom of Ireland could be bound by the ads of parlia¬
ment of England, what needed all the former receptions in the par¬
liament of Ireland, or what ufe will there be of the parliament of Ire¬
land at any time ? If the religion, lives, liberties, fortunes, and ef- J
tates of the clergy, nobility and gentry of Ireland, may be dilpofed j
of, without their privity and confent, what benefit have they of any I
laws, liberties, or privileges granted unto them by the crown of Eng¬
land ? I am loath to give their condition! an hard name ; but I have
no other notion of fiavery, but being bound by a law to which 1 do
not confent.
Again ft tile reflation of Judges.
Eighthly, JTis againfi: feveral refolutions of the learned Judges, of
former times, in the very point in queftion. This is manifeft from
what foregoes in the Cafe of the Merchants of Waterford, Pilking-
ton’s Cafe, Prior of Lanthony’s Cafe, See . But I lfyalj not here en¬
large farther thereon.
Defroys property .
Ninthly, The obligation of all laws having the fame foundation, if
one law may be impofed without confent, any other law whatever
may be impofed on us without our confent. This will naturally in¬
troduce taxing us without our confent ; and this as neceffarily deftroys
our property. I have no other notion of property, but a power of
difpofing my goods as I pleafe, and not as another (hall command :
Whatever another may rightfully take from me without my confent,
I have certainly no property in. To tax me without confent, is little
better, if at all, than downright robbing me. I am lure the great
patriots of liberty and property, the free people of England, cannot
think of fuch a thing, but with abhorrence.
Creates Gonfufon.
Laftly, The people of Ireland are left by this dodrine in the great?
eft confufion and uncertainty imaginable. We are certainly bound to
obey the lupreme authority over us; and yet hereby we are not per¬
mitted to know who or what the fame is ; whether the parliament of
England, or that of Ireland, or both ; and in what cafes the one, and
in what the other: Which uncertainty is or may be made a pretence
at any time for difobedience. It is not impofiible but the different le-
giflatures we are fubjed to, may enad different, or contrary fandions :
Which of thefe mult we obey ?
Inconvenient to England to ajfume this power.
To conclude all, I think it highly inconvenient for England to af-
fume this authority over the kingdom of Ireland : I believe there will
need no great arguments to convince the wife affembly of Englilh fe-
( 6. )
$ nators, how inconvenient it may be to England, to do that which may
i make the Lords and People of Ireland think that they are not well
f ufed, and may drive them into difcontent. The laws and liberties of
, England were granted above five hundred yeiars ago to the people of
: Ireland, upon their fubmifiions to the crown of England, with a de-
fign to make them eafy to England, and to keep them in the allegiance
of the King of England. How confident it may be with true policy,
to do that which the people of Ireland may think is an invafion of their
rights and liberties, I do moll humbly fubmit to the parliament of
England to conlider. They are men of great wifdom, honour, and
juftice : and know how to prevent all future inconveniencies. We
have heard great outcries, and defervedly, on breaking the edict of
Nantes, and other ftipulations ; how far the breaking our conftitution,
which has been of five hundred years Handing, exceeds that, 1 leave
the world to judge. It may perhaps be urged, that his convenient
for the Hate of England, that the fupreme council thereof fhould
make their jurifdidion as large as they can. But with fubmiffion, I
conceive that if this affirmed power be not juft, it cannot be conveni¬
ent for the ftate. What Cicero fays in his offices, Nothing is profitable
that is not upright , is moft certainly true. Nor do I think that his
anywife neceffary to the good of England to affert this high jurif-
di<ftion over Ireland. For fince the ftatutes of this kingdom are made
with fuch caution and in fuch form, as is prefcribed by Poynings Aft,
io Henry VII. and by the 3d and 4th of Philip and Mary, and whilft
Ireland is in Engfifti hands, I do not fee how his pofiible for the par¬
liament of Ireland to do any thing that can be in the leaft prejudicial
to England. But on the other hand, if England affume a jurifdi&ion
over Ireland, whereby they think their rights >and liberties are taken
away ; that their parliaments are rendered meeriy nugatory, and that
their lives and fortunes depend on the will of a legifiature wherein
they are not parties ; there may be ill confequences of this. Advanc¬
ing the power of the parliament of England, by breaking the rights
of another, may in time have ill effects.
The rights of parliament fhould be preferved facred and inviolable,
■wherever they are found. This kind of government, once fo univer-
fal all over Europe, is now almoft vanifhed from amongft the nations
thereof. Our King’s dominions are the only fupporters of this noble
Gothic conftitution, fave only what little remains may be found
thereof in Poland. We fhould not therefore make fo light of that fort
of Jegiflatufe, and as it were abolifh it in one kingdom of the three,
wherein it apptars ; but rather cherifh and encourage it wherever we
meet it.
#
The public may depend on the authenticity of the following
fmall, but valuable piece of that great patriot, the Au¬
thor of the foregoing Case, which the Editor obtained
thro’ the means of the Rev. Mr. TboL Brooke Clarke , from
William John/on , of this City, Efq; who copied it from
the Oiiginal Manuicript in the hand- writing of the Au¬
thor, written in the blank Leaves of one of his printed
Cafes, which he fent to the then Lord Bifhop of Meath* j
. . i ; . «. ♦ - i • . , . '
ORDER OF THE HOUSE of LORDS
in ENGLAND.
DIE MARTIS, 24 Maij , 1698.
J,jy HERE A 8 a Petition and Appeal zvas offered to the Houfe on the
71b of ’January lajl, of the Society of the Governor and Affiants
of London , of the new Plantation in U/fler , in the Kingdom of Ireland , \
againj} a judgment given by the Lords Spiritual and 'Temporal of Ireland
in Parliament there ajjembled , on the 24 th day of September lafi, upon the
Petition and Appeal of William, Lord Bifhop of Derry , agaxnjt the Decree
or Order made in the Jaid Caufe in the Court of Chancery there : Where- j
upon a Committee zvas appointed , to covftder of the proper Method of ap¬
pealing from the Decrees made' in the Court of Chancery in Ireland , and
that pujjuant to the Order of the faid Committee , and a Letter fent to
the Lords Jttjlices of Ireland, by Order of this Houfe: Several prece¬
dents have been tranfmitted by the Lords Juflices to this Houfe, copies
zv hereof zvere ordered to be delivered to either fide: After hearing
counjei upon the Petition of the Society London, prefented to this Houfe the
20 th of April laf , praying that they might be heard , as to the jur if dic¬
tion of the Houfe of Lords in Ireland , in receiving and judging Appeals
from the Chancery there , as aljo counfel for the Bifhop of Derry : After
due conf deration of the precedents , and of vuhat nuns offered by Counfel
thereupon. It is this day ordered , adjudged and declared , by the Lords
Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament afjembled, that the faid Appeal by
the Bijhop of Derry, to the Houfe of Lords in Ireland , from the Decree or
Order of the Court of Chancery there made, in the cauje zvberein the
faid Bifhop of Derry zvas Plaintiff, and the faid Society of the Cover- \
nor and Affiants London, of the Nezv Plantation in LUfler, in Ireland
zvere Defendents, zvas coram non judice, and that all the proceedings
thereupon are null and void, and that the Court of Chancery in Ireland,
ought to proceed in the faid Caufe, as if no fuch Appeal had been made to
the Houfe of Lords there , and if either of the faid Parties do find them-
) elves aggrieved by the faid Decree or Order of Chancery , they arc at
liberty to purfue their proper Remedy by zvay of Appeal to this Houfe.
Ordered, that the Lord Chancellor do zurite to the Lords Juflices of Ire¬
land , and fend them this Order ,
( 63 )
REASONS againft the foregoing ORDER,
By WILLIAM MOLYNEUX, Efq.
i ft. Becaufe upon the conqueft of Ireland by Henry the lid. he
introduced the laws of England in that Kingdom, and fent over the
Modus Tenendi Parliamentum in ‘ Termini /, the lame with that of Eng¬
land, in which record it is laid that fuch things may be examined and
corre&ed, in Pleno Parliaments et non alibi.
2diy. Becaufe in the 20th year of King Henry the Third, it was
provided that all laws and cuftoms which are enjoyed in England,
iha.ll be alfo in Ireland, and that the land lhall be fubjeift thereunto and
governed thereby ftcut Dominus Johannes Ker cum ultimo ejjet in Hiber¬
nia Jlatuit et fieri mandavit et quod Breuia de communi jure qu& cur-
runt in Anglia fimiliter currant in Hibernia . '
3«ily- Becaufe King Edward III. in the 29th year of his reign, or¬
dained for the quiet and good government of the people in Ireland,
that in all cafes whatfoever, errors in judgment, in records, and pro-1
ceedings in the courts of Ireland, lhall be corrected and amended in
parliament in Ireland, <
4thly. Becaufe it appears by other antient records, quod terra Hi-
berni.t intra fe omnes et omnim^das habet curias prout in Anglia.
5 thly. Becaufe a conqueror by the laws of England and of nations,
having power to introduce what laws he will in the conquered coun¬
try, and King Henry II. purfuant to that power, having introduced
the laws of England, and particularly that of holding parliaments in
Ireland, the Houfe of Lords in parliament in Ireland, may proceed to
hear and determine judicially, fuch matters as fhall be brought before
them, in the fame manner as the Lords in parliament in England.
6thly. Becaufe purfuant to the many concefiions made by King
Henry II. King John, King Henry III. and other Kings of England.
The Lords in parliament in Ireland, have proceeded to correct and
amend errors in judgment and decrees in the courts of Ireland, (as
appears by the l'everal precedents certified over to your Lordfhips,)
and their judgments never before this called in queftion, many of
them being very irregular. It is therefore prefumed to have been by
a good and lawful jurifdi&ion, otherwife they would haye been by
our anceftors7 (who were zealous alfertors of their rights) long before
this called in queftion.
7tlily. The order declaring the appeal was coram non judicet and
null and void, will call all other judgments and decrees in queftion,
under which many eftates have been purchafed, fettled, and enjoyed,
which will be of fatal confequence to many families, and create great
difeontent and diftatisfa&ion in that kingdom.
8thly. Becaufe the declaring the faid appeal to be coram non judice ,
and null and void, ftrikes at and tends to the deftru&ion of the jurif-
di&ion of this Houfe, for Ireland having omnes et omnimodas curias
prout in Angliay mull include the high court of parliament, and if their
high court of parliament, being an exatt picture of the high court of
parliament in England, cannot judicially hear and determine appeals,
writs of error, and impeachments, it may from thence be alleged
that this here cannot.
<
( 64 )
9tMy. Becaufe this refolution Strikes at and tends to abridge tlie
King’s prerogative in Ireland ; all appeals and writs of error in par¬
liament, being coram rege in garliamenlo , and therefore thefe words
coram non judice takes from the King the judical power which is given
to him there,
iothly. Becaufe the Peers of Ireland have little elfe left them be-
fide their judicature, which if taken away, they will be oi little
eiteem there, and many of the Peers of England have fome of their
titles of honour from that Kingdom.
irthly. Becaufe it is the glory of the EngliSh laws, and the blefilng
attending Englilhmen, that they have jultice administered at their
doors, and not to be drawn as formerly to Rome, by appeals which
greatly impoverished the nation, and by this order, the people of Ire¬
land mill! be drawn from Ireland hither, whenfoever they receive any
injuflicc from the Chancery there, by which means poor men muft be
trampled upon, not being able to .come over to feek for juftice.
i2thly. The danger of altering, changing, or leffening a conStitu-
tion, for above 500 years unfhaken, or fo much as called in qiiehion
in any one thing, (the cuftom and ufage of Courts being the law of
Courts) may occafion the deftrurtion of the whole, for the judicial
power of the Houle of Peers in Ireland, in criminal caufes by way of
impeachment or otherwife, may by the fame reafon be called in ques¬
tion, as their judicature in civil catifes, which will encourage evil dif-
pofed men, efpecially thofe in employment in that Kingdom, (who are
generally very arbitrary.) to art wickedly ; and the better we preferve
the constitution of Ireland and of thofe plantations dependant on
England, the better we fhall preferve our own — and they will be bar¬
riers to ours, to prevent any invafion of theirs, and Since the Kings
of England have in all times in matters relating to their revenue, their
grants by letters patent, and their Ministers not only empowered the
Parliament of Ireland to hear, corrert, reform and amend them, but
alfo acquiefced in their judgment, it ought not now to be questioned.
I3thly. Becaufe this taking away the jurifdirtion of the Lords Houfe
in Ireland, may be a means to difquiet the Lords there, and difap-
point the King’s affairs.
i4thlv. Becaufe the judicial power of the Houfe of Peers in Ireland
is in no refpert altered by an act of parliament, — the Statute of the 10th
of Hen. 7. c. 4. called Poynings Law, only direrts a new form of
palling bills into laws, but alters nothing of tlie judicial power, and
their argument of their having the interpretation of all laws by a ju¬
dicial power being allowed them, will enable them to make the laws
what they pleale, will as well hold againft the jurifdirtion of this
Houfe, which ought not to be fuffered.
i
>
I '
LETTER
TO THE
MEN OF IRELAND.
B Y
Owen Roe 0 ’’Nial.
(Originally publifhed in the Year 1779.)
j
LETTERS
TO THE
I
MEN of IRELAND.
LETTER FIRST.
I F ever there was a moment of time big with the very fate of any
nation, the prefent is that moment to Ireland. If ever there was
a moment when to interpofe with the energy of foul and body, became
every individual of the hate, who has an underftanding to perceive,
an heart to feel, and an arm obedient to his will, the prefent is that
moment to Ireland. Not prefuming then upon my own wifdom, but
thinking it now no prefumption to offer my private opinion, and, in
the name of the nation, to call upon others to give theirs in corrup¬
tion orlupport, I take up the pen with the boldnefs of a freeman, nor
Ihall I finally lay it down, till the objed’t appears to me either attained
or unattainable ; till I fee freedom eftablifhed, or mud lament its ex¬
tinction, convinced that boldnefs will be not only unavailing to the
Hate, but fatal to the individual. Sunk as is England, unhappy as
Ireland has been ever fmce her connection with England, in this one
refpedt, git lead, each of them enjoys a portion both of dignity and
happinefs,— the liberty of the prefs, that cenfurate of the people, yet
remains uhviolated, for Juries yet are Judges. In their breads lies
that conftrudlion of malice which conftitutes the illegality, as it does
the guift of words or of actions. We have the whole field of enqui¬
ry before us, and we may queftion the propriety of tolerating the
exiftence of thofe powers, whofe bare extent to queftion was once, I
may fay, admitted a blafphemy. The Magiftrate is now beginning to
be fenlible, that the actions alone of men are his proper object, for
they are unequivocal, objects of fenfe, and may be retrained or pu¬
nched by the laws ; but that opinions fcorn his coercion, and, even
where their tendency is dangerous, come not under his cognizance,
till the action follows the opinion, and the law is adtually infringed.
He has befides learned from experience, that to punifh the propagar
E 2
( 68 ) - ,
tor of an opinion, is indirectly to own its truth, and its likelihood to
make converts. Should, for indance, fome vifionary fay to the world,
that a great King imperial, born of an illuftrious race, a race invited
to the glorious talk of confirming and efiablifhing liberty in a country
that more than once had rifqued its all for the obtaining ot it, ihculd
he affert that he underftood better the conftru&ion of a fly-trap than
the law of nature and nations ; that he had more the obfiinacy of a
mule than the perfeverance of a man ; more of tl*e low mischievous
cunning of a natural, than of the afpiring aim, the fteady dignified
wifdom of a philofopher; more of the infatiable rapacioufnefs and
fullennefs of a tyrant, than the enlarged and well directed zeal, the
glowing benevolence of a patriot King : — If, 1 fay, fome vifionary, or
l'ome hireling fcribbler, fhould tell us that fuch a creature exifted, and
bore the name of King, would a fenfible loyalifi be in wrath with the
pretended portrait, or could the minifier but fmile ? It is not in nature !
would exclaim the former ; The latter would calmly reply, we know
it to be falfet If then, my countrymen, I am abfurd ; contempt both
from you and the minifier will be my portion and my punilliment. It
what I offer be reafon, it cannot be a libel. If, galled by the feverity
cf truth, the minifier would liften to the fuggeflions of an imprudent
revenge, the found of his fir ft ftep will be a watch-word. Ye are men !
I will not infult you by inftruttion.
There is a timidity in politics, as in every other art or fcience,
which, like timidity in common life, ftifles in conception all grandeur
of defign, robs refolution of its hue, enterprize cf its pith, and mull
end in inaction, if not ignominy and remorfe.
He who lets himfelf down, and weighs every poffible accident that
may thwart his defign, and where much good is promifed, allows
himfelf to be terrified at every appearance of evil, fuch a man may
live harmlefs in a foiitu'de, but he has not virtue for fociety. Let him
retire to a cell ! he was not made for action, — he may be fainted by
fuperftitiorqbut a fjpirited reformer will expunge him from his calendar.
There is no occafion in which this timidity will be more evi¬
dent than in times big with event, or on the eve of revoluti¬
ons. It is in fuch cafes often amiable, I was going to fay re-
ipeCtablc. It then behoves every man to Weigh deeply before he de¬
cides. It behoves him to confult the fenilbility of his heart-firings,
before he takes a fiep that may rend the tendered of them afunder.
It behoves him to confider well the value of his objeCt, and to com¬
pare the probability of attaining it with the danger of the experiment.
A thoufand things it behoves him to confider, and long, very long,
rauft he be toiled in painful uncertainty, before even firmnefs can take ;
courage, or decifion can decide.
Let us then paufe, weigh, and confider our fituation, as well in I
ourfelvcs as with rdpeCt to others. Let us confider the crifis. But i
when we have weighed and confiHered, the goal is before us : our part .
is firmnefs.
That the fituation of Ireland is capable of improvement, that it is,
net. exactly fuch as the warm imagination,' the benevolent enthuflafini]
of a Plate, a More, or a Montefquieu, would have formed in his !
dreams ot perfection and happinefs, we have not a bankrupt traded,
a half naked peaiant, ora ftarving manufacturer would have the cou-
( 69 )
rage to aflert. We have however reafon to be fatisfied with cur bank¬
ruptcy, our nakednefs, and our famine, fince Manchefter and Glaf-
gow are Satisfied with them> fince the Lords of England are content*
and the Commons have joined in declaring them conditutional and
rightful. But they have not yet denied us the liberty of thinking. I
propole then to enquire, as a matter of mere philofophic curiofity ;
firft, — Whether in the prefent podure of affairs, it is probable that
Ireland might recover her Independence ? and fecondly, — Is indepen¬
dence worth contending for ?
It may feem odd, that 1 do not fird confider the value of the obje6l
bef ore I am at the trouble of enquiring into the probability of attain¬
ing it. But, befides that there are fewer perfons with whom the lat¬
ter can be a matter of doubt, it would be of little importance to en¬
quire, whether a certain change would be advantageous, if the im¬
probability of effecting it almoft amounts to the impoffible. Were I
to indilute an enquiry, whether it would be ufeful to man to have
power over the elements, I believe I ffiould be able to find few fellow
adventurers in the fpeculation. But if I begin by enquiring if fuch
power could podibly and cafily be obtained, the very novelty of the
fubjeft might perhaps procure me a hearing.
Before 1 enter upon thefe queftions, I mud beg leave to premife, by
way of lemma, or infrodudlory argument, a principle upon which I
intend to build much, and which 1 (hall therefore beg leave particu¬
larly and minutely to difeufs.
The principle is this, --that political bodies, whether foie or aggre¬
gate, whether compofcd of one perfon or a multitude, a£t uniformly
from the narrowed kind of l'elhihnefs, and are totally incapable of a
ileady or uniform principle of generofity. The obfervation may be
farther extended to individuals, (though no body politic) who .from
their fituaticn have been under the neceflity of a&ing more from po¬
litical than moral motives. Morality is felt. Politics mud be dudied.
The confcience of the man is natural. That of the politician artifi¬
cial. The habit of reafoning only, is not favourable to feeling. The
habit of being cunning is not favourable to dri&nefs of principle. In
general then we cannot expert politicians to be either generous or jud.
To fee how collective bodies will be mod likely to a<d towards each
other, but little pains are necefl’ary. All perfons are fufliciently fclfifh,
but few are in any degree generous. The afFeftions of mod people are
as ^omedic as their charity, fo celebrated by Swift. “ They fcarce
ever travel abroad.” They end where they Ihould begin — at home.
Some however can feel for the little community to which they belong.
A few for their country. But how many are they who are born for
the univerfe ? Shuffle thefe men into communities, and then will it be
afked, if communities can be be fuppofed capable of generofity ? Can.
the majority be fuppofed either generous or jud? Take the matter as
between an individual of one nation, and the body of another nation,
can it be fuppofed that the few attachments which he can have with
a few of that other nation, to the majority of whom he mud be at
bed very indifferent, will overcome the force of felfilhnefs, and that he
will divide his favours among a million, becaufe he has a friendfhip for
one? Even the generous are not difpleafed with gratitude, but here
the obligation is fcarcc felt by an individual of the obliged, andth^
( 7° )
merit is loft in the number of obligers. There will be few favours, and
gratitude will fcarce exift. — But will this individual be as little likely
to injure as to ferve a nation ? I cannot think fo. Selfifnnefs is eternal¬
ly in arms, while benevolence often fleeps on herpoft. In athoufand
acts of injuftice the individual will be fneltered and even applauded
by the multitude of his aftociates. Fear of difgrace, which alone
perhaps keeps him honeft in private life, will make him difhoneft in
public. A palpable injuftice wall be lawful policy. Political villany
will be love to his country. The honeft man will often give up his
private confcience to his fenfe of duty to the ftate. The fame facrifice
will be pretended to by the villain. If fuch will be the probable line
of conduct which an individual of one nation or community will ob-
ierve towards another nation, what muft one nation expert from an¬
other ? “ Are not the chances, nay the certainties, of coldnefs, un-
fteadinefs, injuftice, and inhumanity, encreafed almoft to infinity ?’*
The unlearned in arithmetic would be aftonilhed at the amount of the
combination. The fteps of nations have been ever planted in felfifh-
nefs, marked with injuftice, and may be traced in blood. Their mo¬
numents are defolation. Their glory is the ftain of humanity — Let
us compare farts with reafoning. They will confirm it to a miracle !
—And firft as to individuals, who have been politicians by neceffi-
ty or choice. — Moft Catholic Kings have they not been the encou-
ragers of herefy ? Has never Prefbyter ruled with the pride of a feli-
created bilhop ? Did never reformer pull down the fpiritual crown of
the pope, that he himfelf might wear it as part of his own, or enjoy
its power under lank hair or a night cap? God’s vicegerents upon
earth have fomented rebellion againft princes. Defpots (thofe fteady
friends to the peace, good order, and fubordination of fociety !) have
in the dominions of others fowm the feeds of anarchy ; or, what feems
much more unnatural, thofe whofe mean ambition rendered them ene¬
mies to equality, and who could have wifhed freedom had but one
neck, if they had held the fword, thefe men have planted, foftered,
and proterted Republicanifm. Can Guatimozin * himfelf even in the
generous ardour of his zeal and the fire of his confuming indignation,
can he reftrain a tear for the weaknefs of humanity, .when he relates
what I am obliged to add, that he whom no allurements could lhake,
no dangers could difmay, who brightened by difficulties and gained
luftre from defeats, who refufed the proffered fovereignty of his coun¬
try, and treated with contempt the fupport and friendlhip of her ene¬
mies, wrho, rather than fee her ruin, could have embraced with a
great defpair “ Death — in the laft ditch of his country,” — that he,
even he, of ever glorious memory, in anfwer to the petitions of his
new fubjerts, whom policy made it necefiary to cultivate, could declare
with the cold blood of an aftaftin, his deliberate intention of ruining
the Irifti woollen manufarture, that the Englifh might profit by it —
could declare, in effert, that he would wreft the morfel from the mouth
of famine, to give another provocation to the fated appetite of glutto¬
ny ? Can you believe this, my countrymen ? — It is a fart, if there be
truth in hiftory, if the records of England be not all as falfe as feme
of them are difgraceful ! — But heroes have been men; there have
been individual villains in all ages. Nations will afford us a more
* Guatimozin s Letters mere publijked jhorlly before thefe.
( 7i )
amiable profpech They cannot, as one man have confpited the rum
of virtue and liberty ! they cannot have been fo corrupt as to bid de¬
fiance to fliame ! They cannot have been fo foolixh as to fhow an ex¬
ample of tyranny, that might one day be turned upon themfelves f—
I grant there is a difference between nations and individuals. The
difference is great. Individuals have been ofteii and uniformly ge¬
nerous ; nations never. Their uniform principle is policy, either
real or fuppofed. Unlefs this is underftood, their conduit will appear*
a chaos of inconfiftency. But what will feem extraordinary is, that
thofe nations who enjoyed mod liberty themfelves have been ever the
greateft tyrants of others, and the provinces of a defpotic King have
generally been treated more kindly than thofe of, free dates *.
The reafon is, that in a free ftate, every man is in a degree one of the
government, and few men in power like to part with it. Mod are
willirig to abufe it. The proud cannot bear fpirit in others, and there
are more men of pride than of dignity. To a defpotic King all his
fubjeCts are pretty equal, provided they pay him his taxes ; and if his
government is rather mild, the provinces will (hare it. The free citi¬
zen of a free date will hardly put his fubjeCts in the province on a
footing with hirnfelf, their Lord and Governor in his capital. Com¬
mon intered, and even common calamity, unites the provinces fubjeCt
to defpotifm. They have but one mader tofatisfy or guard againll — -
oppofition of intereds difunites the Lords of a free date from their
fubjeCts in the province. Thefe have as many maders as there are men.
in the fuperior date, and each would be fatisfied, every individual
would dalk in the mockery of fancied Majedy. Every individual would
enjoy his revenues and his taxes ; every individual would propofe his
laws and his redraints — and all redraints would be falutary. The cry
of every individual is unconditional lubmidion 1 and the fubjsCt nation
has no hope but in the impotence or fubjeCtion of its maders.
But to fads. — Athens the brave, the civilized, the polite, the letter¬
ed and the wife, {he who defended the liberties of Greece at Marathon
and Salamis, how long was die the tyrant of Sicily, and how cruel
was her tyranny !
The world has feen thofe who for their own country defpifed death
and were fuppliants for torture, f who in their own city “ could
brook the infernal devil as eafily as a King,” even thofe has the
world feen impofe upon other nations a multitude of tyrants, each
of them more infolent, more inhuman than a fingle one.
England fat by a tame unconcerned fpedator while Corfica was fold
by a republic, and deluged with blood by a monarchy. That fame
monarchy is now protecting the revolted colonies of England, whofe
tyranny forced them into a republic. She is protecting a republic the
very contraft of herfelf in manners, opinions, religion, prejudices,
and fpirit, while thofe who took from a king f their boaft, that
“ they were free as their own thoughts,” and who have facrificed kings
themfelves at the altar of freedom ; they have driven Indians from
their own woods, through zeal for civilization ; chriftianity and jus¬
tice have carried others into captivity, becaufe their complexions
darkened under a fiercer fun ; and are now carrying fire, fword,, and
icalping-knife into the country of their brethren, becaufe they thought
* Hume, f Regu/us. \ Alfred.
( 72 )
the leading-firings of an infant an incumbrance to a man; — becaufe
they could not be grateful to them for the retailed gilts of nature, be
in loVe with poverty, and in raptures with flavery.
If honefty, an inbred fteady principle of lionefly, were to be ex¬
pelled from any nation, it might furely be looked for in one that was
ignorant of the ufe of money ; in a nation, three hundred of whofe
citizens, headed by a King, devoted themfelves for their country, and
tepulfed the millions of Xerxes ; in a nation where all the weaknefs
of the woman and the mother fled at the name of traitor f , and he was
no longer a fon who was no longer a citizen. Yet the Spartan*
have had their Helotes, and the Englifh have their Irish! Were
the blood-hounds or the barbed arrows of the Spartan more fevere or
more keen to the body, than are the infults of the Briton to the mind ?
Boys hunted the Helotes: The Irish are the scoff of fools !
LETTER SECOND.
£ V M qutjque faber fortune ejly is one of thofe truths which the ex¬
perience of ages has handed down as a proverb.
What is true of every individual mull be fo of nations — “ Their
fortune mud depend upon themselves.”
It is a truth well worthy the deep confideration of Ireland — I have,
in my former letter, endeavoured to convince her by reaibning, and an
appeal to hiflorical fails, of what lhe fhould long ere this have learned
from experience, — that whatever juftice or generofity exifts among in¬
dividuals, it is vain to look for it in the mutual intercourfe of nations.
Their principles policy.
It is time for Ireland to take thought for herfelf.
That Ireland hath been, and is, fubordinate to, and dependent on
the imperial crown of Great Britain, and that the King’s Majefty,
with the confent of the Lords and Commons of Great Britain in Par¬
liament, hath power to make laws to bind the people of Ireland*, is
a truth too melancholy to admit contradiilion. That it of right
“ ought’’ to be fo, was referved for the modefty and good fenfe of an
Englifh parliament to affert, and would therefore be a blunder in
Irifhmen to deny.
That no nation can by conqueft, or by any other means, acquire a
right of perpetual dominion over another ; that no confent or contrail,
however exprefs or lolemn, can bind pofterity to their injury ; that no
prefeription or length of time can fanilify oppreftion ; that little defer¬
ence is due to names impofed by the opprelfors upon the ail of af-
fuming lights unalienable in their nature, and only overborne by
force, or overlooked by folly ; thefe are propofitions which I fhall not
attempt to enlarge upon. Time, with moft minds, gives a facrednefs
| 7 be mother of Taufanias, * 6 Geo. /. cb. 5.
( 73 ')
to error : enquiry then bears the name of impiety : but the idols of
one age are trampled under foot in another, and the prejudices which v
once required a Locke to remove, are in thefe days but themes to the
fchools.
I fhall not then war with the dead; nor (hall I offend the delicacy
of an Englilh Judge, by doubting the propriety, or difputing the omni¬
potence of an Englilh acd of parliament. That would be “ to oppofe
iny private Irilh judgment to public Englilh authority'*.” And, in lb
plain, a cafe, the oppofition “ mull be virulent and factious f.” Au¬
thority mull be ever in the right! The demand of Magna Chart*
was but a fuccefsful rebellion ; the Reformation was an impious defec¬
tion from the church ; and the author of chrilfianity was an heretic
and a traitor I Ireland then, by right, ought to be, nay more, for
ever muff be, fubordinate to the fovereign legillative Parliament of
Great Britain. I acknowledge it ! my reafon is a ftrong one ; fhe
thinks fo herfelf ; and who dare deny the competency of her judgment ?
She thinks herfelf formed by nature an -humble attendant upon Eng¬
land. She crouches under what fhe calls neceflity. Her loyalty dares
not form a wilh for the prefervation of her crown in the houfe. of Ha¬
nover, united with the feparate independency of her own legislature:
becaufe fhe looks upon that wilh as hopelefs. The very thought, to
her, leems madnels ! the attempt, fhe apprehends, would be ruin !
I owe a deference to the general opinion,' and fhall fubmit to it ;
yet as all found judgment on this quellion, can only be built upon ex¬
perience, it leems not unreasonable to enquire, were it but as matter
of fpeculation, into the fate of other countries, which having been
nearly in the fame fituation with Ireland, endeavoured to mend their
condition. One advantage will certainly refult from the enquiry,
which cannot fail of proving acceptable to a people, who have hither¬
to appearedmore delighted with their fears, than with any other feel¬
ings of the human heart. It will lead us, by the consideration of our
fuperior refources, to ellimate infallibly the quantum of national pu-
nifhment, likely to be fuperadded to our prefent burdens, by our mas¬
ters, the Parliament of Great Britain, for the efforts of this-day, when
their leifure and fecurity fhall permit them to turn their thoughts to us.
In proportion to our fuperior power of refilling, will the means be of
preventing, in future, the poflibility of the operation of fuch a refifl-
ance.
A late refpe<5table writer has already enumerated the natural
advantages of Ireland. It appears that fhe poffelfes within herfelf,
or immediately within her reach, almoff every advantage that nature
or fituation can give, or that i» neceffary to make a nation rich, great,
and ha pi y.
A climate of the fined temperature, a foil of moll extraordinary
fertility ; mines that encouragement might convert into fources of na¬
tional indullry and national Superiority ; fcas that teem with fi{h ; har¬
bours numerous, fafe, commodious, and well Situated for commerce;
and, to conclude, a people with capacity for every thing, who want
but leave to acquire habits of indullry, as perfevering as fpirited.
* 6 George 1. ch. 5. *f* See Blackflone sCom. book 4. p. 50, Iriffo edit,
§ Guatimozin.
( 74 )
Thefe are the natural advantages of Ireland. How few nations
can boaft fo many and fo great? Compare her rank and confc-
quence in the world, with what thefe advantages might entitle her to.
— Enquire then wnence arifes the difference, and thank England, if
you can, for the generofity of her prote&ion !
Are either the United Provinces, or Switzerland, to be compared
to Ireland in natural advantages ? I cannot think they are. The for¬
mer is but one-third, the latter only one half her fize. Ireland is an
iflnnd, and fuch an one as I have deftribed ; rich in climate, foil,
mines, and harbours. Switzerland is in the heart of the Continent,
and is poor in ail thefe, — the latter Ihe cannot poffefs at all. The
Dutch States are joined to the Continent; their fhore is dangerous
from its flats ; does not afford them a Angle good harbour ; and the
fro If binds up their commerce during a confiderable part of the win¬
ter. I need not mention the fifh which the lakes of Switzerland afford.
The fUheries of Holland lie upon our coaft. They enjoy more from
their unchecked induftry, than we from nature and the protection of
England. The Dutch have no mines. The Swifs don’t work theirs,
except for their nece/fary inftruments of war and agriculture. Neither
Holland nor Switzerland produces corn for half their inhabitants.
In the latter half the harveft produced by a ftubborn foil is often de¬
ft royed by (forms, and but part of the remainder is allowed by the cli¬
mate to ripen.
The Swifs may be faid to have neither commerce nor navigation ;
fincethe latter they have only on their lakes, the former is concerned
wholly in necelfaries.
Of the timber of the Swifs I need not fpeak. They can have no
navy, nor do they require one. As to Holland, the fpongy produce
of her] marfhes is ufelefs in trade or navigation. Her navy muff be
purchafed by induftry. Ireland may be as induftrious' as Holland,
but fhe requires it lefs. She may raile a navy at home, if ihe cannot
with more advantage bring materials from abroad. The climate of
Switzerland may make an hardy race of foldiers or hufbandmen, but
to a nation that would aim at more t han a penurious exiflence, it can¬
not be a fubjeCt of envy. The climate of Holland, marftiy in its foil,
and interfered by fo many ftagnated canals, is not wholefome. Some
of their towns are formed on the foil left by the ftagnation of rivers.
In others the folid foundations of the earth feemed to have forfaken
them, and they laid new ones. The fea threatens to overwhelm them.
They oppole it with mounds, which require a continual repair, and
dream not of danger, though the failure of a bank would give them
a fecond deluge.
Labour and induftry are in Holland neceftary. — They cannot other -
wife exift. This, it is true, will keep them laborious and induftrious.
But what they arc from neceflity, other nations may be from nobler
motives, and Ireland lets out from a point which in Holland it required
the labour and induftry <of years to gain.
Holland muff be a drudge, as fhe fubftfts on the wants of other
nations, and thefe, we know, are moftly artificial. She is their faCtor
and carrier. She may fuller from their caprice. She muff languifh
in their ill-humour. Their induftry, or even frugality, would ftarve
her, Ireland is more independent. She can fubfftf by her internal re-
( 75 )
fources, though the world ftiould refufe her either commerce or em¬
ployment. She is rich in herfelf. Nature that made her an ifland, and
gave her fertility, qualified her equally for abfolute independence, and
i unlimited intercourse with other nations. She can fubfift without ether
nations. She can trade with them to mutual advantage.
Such are the natural advantages of Holland and Switzerland, and
I filch are they compared with Ireland. America I llia.ll briefly confider
hereafter. Each of the former is furrounded by powerful empires.
Each of them was once oppreffed by all the rigours of flavery. Each
of them burft her fnackles, and baffled the molt inveterate attacks cf
enemies whofe power feemed to approach them with the irrefiftibiiity
i of fate.
Holland, inferior to Ireland in every natural advantage, and equal
to but a third of her in fize, threw off the yoke of the moil powerful
Monarch then in Europe. The firmnefs and courage which fhe difplay-
ed will appear incredible to thofe who are unacquainted with the power
of enthufiafm. The feven provinces we are fpeaking of furraounted
every difficulty — they thought they could defend themfeives. The ten
other provinces, fays Voltaire, would have a foreign Prince to pro¬
tect them, and are in flavery to this day.
One Prince § to whom they applied for affiftance, was himfelf en¬
gaged in civil wars, and yet tottered on his throne. The extreme
caution of another in foreign enterprize, correfponded but ill
with her magnanimity and refolution in domeftic affairs; and
from the reprimands fhe was daily giving to her Houfe of Com¬
mons, for prefuming to judge of the duty they were called to,
fhe feemed little likely to tempt the wrath of a powerful ty¬
rant or turn abettor of rebellion. The fuccours received by the
States were accordingly for a long time feeble and clandeftine. To
obtain open affiftance from Elizabeth required a longer ftruggle :
and even the offer of their fovereignty. But before any affiftance had
been received by the States, they had gotten polleffion of what Do&of
Johnfon calls “ the choice of Evil” — Their darling obje<5t liberty.
. The very women had formed regiments for the defence of their cities j
and, rather than again fall under the hated tyranny of Spain, the
dykes and fluices had been opened, and the very Peafants, fays Hume,
had been active in ruining their own fields by an inundation, — they
preferred the mercy of the waters to that of tyrants.
Thefe fame people have fince withftood the mod formidable attacks
of a Monarch who thought his power equal to univerfal empire. They
have fupported themfeives with more than equal honour againft the
combined fleets of France and England. They have fwept the chan¬
nel of England, and their infults in the Thames have carried confter-
nation to the capital.
In little more than half a century from the time, at which, unpre¬
pared as they muft have been, they firft ventured to take up arms
againft Spain in defence of their liberty, they beat one of their for¬
midable Armadas *. They obliged it to take fhelter in the Downs
under the Englifh flag. They retire for a reinforcement ; they re-
§ Henry IV. of France. X Queen Elizabeth.
* The Duke of Alva left the Lon.v Countries in the year \ 5 74. — They beat
the Spar, if? Anna da in 1639.
(/ 7 6 )
iolve* that the fleet of England (hall no longer proteCl tlicii* enemy \
they return to the charge ; and the Spanilh navy in its flight received
from them a blow which at this day, after near a century and an halt,
it has not fully recovered. — A few years more, aflided by a few more
defeats, foftened the obllinacy of Spain. She acknowledged the inde¬
pendence of the States f, and in twenty years after they protected her
provinces againft France f.
The Swils, now that they are free, are more fecure from attacks,
than when they were dependant; They are defended by their moun¬
tains and the barrennefs of their country, by their poverty, by their
valour, and by the mutual jealoufies of the neighbouring empires.
A partition is not eafiiy agreed upon, and noire will confent to their
becoming an acceflion to the power of another, if iuch an accellion
were practicable. But it mud be confelfed that of all the advantages
I have mentioned, their valour aloye, at the time they threw off the
yoke, feemed moll in their favour. The enemy had poffeilion of their
country. The balance of power was then lets underilood, or lefs at¬
tended to, and their poverty and commercial infignificance mud have
been feeble inducements to the protection ot their neighbours. Accor*
dingly they had to work out their own liberty, and above three cen¬
turies elapfed before the Houfe of Audria acknowledged their inde¬
pendance
X believe there are few will deny that America has already edablifli-
ed her independance. She would not come over and prodrate heri'elf
attheleetoi England, lb England, with the magnanimity of a con¬
queror, appointed ambalfadors to her by aft of Parliament. Upon
England’s condefcending “ to treat with armed rebels,” they refuted
to treat with England. They had procured friends, and they pre¬
ferred them to mailers. For the lituation of America in the begin¬
ning of the coated, hear her own unexaggerated description. “ With¬
out arms, ammunition, difeipiine, revenue, government, or ally, al*
mod totally dript of commerce, and in the weaknel's of youth, as it
were, “ with a Raff and a fling only,” fhe dared, “ in the name of
the Lord of Hods,” to engage a gigantic advyfarv, prepared at all
points, bonding of his drengch, and of whom even mighty warriors
were greatly afraid.”
When to this enumeration of difficulties, which, one is tempted to
think, requires little addition, we fubjoin the following ; that theie
colonies were not more dilunited by didance of place, than by differ¬
ence of opinion, manners, fpiric, religion and government ; that they
were fo difunited in all thefe, that it feemed the dream of a dotard to
think of connecting them in one intered, or of bringing them to co¬
operate, if they could be convinced that their intered was the fame j
that they were expofed to the navy and arms of England on their feu-
f "Treaty of Munfert 1648. f Trifle alliance in 1668.
* They took up arms in the year 1308. — Their independance was acknow¬
ledged in 1648, by the treaty of Alunjlery the fame by which Spain ackoiow-
ledged the independence of the United Provinces.
It would keftngular enough if the fa)}is period which ef all foes A oner i can
independance , foal l be found to have defroyed the ufurpation of the Brit if
Parliament over the legijlative rights of Ireland .
( 77 )
coafls, to the incurfions of Indians (perhaps too juftly enraged) on their
rear, andj in fome provinces, to the more dangerous infurreclions
of their domeftic flaves, whofe difpofitions to revenge muff have been
expelled to burff on their more immediate oppreffors ; when all tbefe
particulars, I lay, are confidered, befides thole which America herfelf
has enumerated, I think fcarce any nation on the earth fhpuld abio-
lutely defpair.
Let us confider the prefcnt fituaticn of Ireland. — I pepd fcarce fay
that there is not an maritime power in Europe to which her alliance
would not, in itfelf, be an object of emulation. Vv hat then would it
appear to the enemies of England ? if Ireland fhould alk their pro-
teftion, would they require to founded at a di fiance, or to be alia i led
by preparatory arguments and leading propofitions ? Would they
they think it prudent to adl as they did by America, to hand by, cool
fpedators of our Ifruggle, till they judged how far we fliould be able
to perfeyere or be likely to fucceed ? or, if they determined to a (lift
Ireland, would they be obliged to have recourfe to art in order to de¬
ceive a credulous minitjer, and to malic their intentions until they could
declare them with fafety ? No, my countrymen : D iff ant propofitions,
preparatory arguments, negotiation, art, — all theie are to us unne-
ceffary ! Convidtion has long been confirmed. Their resolution is al¬
ready taken. Their arms are already in their hands.r They have
c rolled the Atlantic for their own iptereif and for the humiliation of
England, Will a few leagues terrify them when their fcheme is fo near
arriving at almoft unhoped for perfection ? They were then at peace,
yet they engaged in war. They are now at war will they not carry it
on? The lole queftion with them at prefect muff be this: Will they
chufe to vifit us as enemies or as friends? For vi'lit us they probably
will. — Will they attempt a conqueff to which they are probably une¬
qual ; or will they chufe the eaiier road, and offer an alliance, which
will have every real advantage to be expedited from dominion, without
the danger of hn unfuccefsfqi attempt, or the inconvenicncies qnd ha¬
zards of the moft N fuccel'sful execution? Will they not offer an alli¬
ance fuch as their good fenfe has been content with from America,
and which they have thought worthy of fupporting by a war with
England? Such an alliance as, from its liberality, it will be the in-
tereil of the other European poyrers, at leaf!, by a tacit acquielcence,
to fupport. An alliance that will not contribute more to the weaken¬
ing of an haughty adverfary, ^and the difapppintment of an infatiable
monopolist, than to their own regal power, aggrandifement and glory.
And here, my countrymen, occurs an awful paufe ! What induce¬
ments hath Britifh policy fufFered to take root in the hearts of Jrilh-
men, to enable them to refill luch ncceflary and proffered protection ?
None, my friends ! Loyalty, the faireft flower that can ornament the
bofoin of a Prince, finds in Ireland its happieft foil. Perfonal attach¬
ment to the K-ing of Ireland, and his illuflrious houfe, is the cord
which binds us to our burden, and furnilhes to a Britifh people the oc-
cafion of loading us without bounds or mercy. Had ve as little at¬
tachment to the Houfe of Hanover as Scotland, or Manchefter, we
had long fmee in defpair implored the protedlion of other powers, for
fo long as the “ Parliament of Great Britain can bind us in all cafe^
whatfoever,” the wovil that could happen to us would be to change
C 7* J
our matters f. The word is not my own. It is by an Englifh Judge
and commentator directly applied to the fituation of this kingdom and
its fubordination to England by right of conqueft.
But has England learned nothing from her late experience in Ame¬
rica ? Will {he for ever truft to our loyalty alone, and will our King
for ever leave us at the mercy of a Britilh Parliament ? As to the
Englilh people, the power of God has been difplayed to them in vain.
They feem to have revived the age of miracles, and to have left the
Egyptians at a diftance. All that Ihould have infpired them with awe,
humility, and wifdom, feqms but to have darkened their underftand-
ings aiid hardened their hearts! But let it be our duty, my country¬
men, to confider the crifis, and profit of it ! Let us adore that
wonder-working God, who in the intoxication of our oppreffors, has
laid the foundation of our relief ; and who, in the milcarriages of Bri-
tifh tyranny beyond the Atlantic, has taught Irifhmen the practicability
of their own emancipation from the authority of an ufurping Englifh
Parliament.
But we are nearer to England. I hear my countrymen lament
it, — apd often have I lamented it myfelf ! — Yet, (indulge me, my
countrymen, while I explain my paradox!) on that very proximity
©OES THE WEAL OF IRELAND DEPEND.
We are near to England ; but we are near to abidance alfo. The
Atlantic rolls not between us and England ; but neither does it roll be¬
tween us and her enemies. Thefe enemies are on the way. Before
the wind changes they are here. Our proximity to England is to us,
in the prefent potture of affairs, what the dittance of America was in
the beginning of the ccnteft, to her. The latter was a barrier againft
Britain ; the former is a bridge for her foes. In this refpeCf then we
are equal to America. We have however an advantage from our
proximity, which fhe never can derive from her diftance. It is a per¬
petual guarantee againft the oppreftion of any felf-created protec¬
tor. It is perpetual, becaufe it depends not on the policy or caprice
of kings or of nations, [t is fixed in the nature of things.
America might have been ruined by the treachery of France, or (he
may yet fall by Congrefs, as England has done by a Parliament.
f It may be feen by Bhckjlone , b. I. p. loo. what an Englifh lawyer
thinks the necefary confequejice of all dependance upon England l JVe Tire
hound by every law foe, in her wifdom or wantonnefs, thinks proper to pre-
feribe. We fhall foon, 1 fuppofe, be on a foot i ho with thofe Jlaves of the Rod¬
mans who were bound to ibe glebe, or foil. — England will think proper that
nve fhould not depart from the foil , but be transferred with it ly deed , roll, or
Indenture. This will fave us a multitude of difputes about our property, for
we fhall then, like the Roman flakes, become per fell things, and ceafe to
be persons. The Engl if? prints will then a ford entertainment to thofe who
can relifh it. If any of us arc mifing from our falls or lumber-rooms, we
fhall be advertifed for, and d'fcribed, as “ lost, strayed, stolen, or
mislaid/’ — JVe fhall le taken damage feaf ant, (perhaps rider and all ! )
and if we happen to die of cold and hunger, in an open pound , it will he at
the flit of the owner l - O Ireland l Ireland! Dof thou retain one fpark
of feel'mg , to onake the cpprefion of thee a crime ?
( 79 )
Let Ireland be fubjeft toiler own leglilation only, and one might
Venture to fay fhe is free for ever. Her fituation and fize fit her tor
that moderate degree of ftrength and power which is moil likely to be
permanent. < , ' N
Let thefe things be weighed, and perhaps that man could not be
acquitted of prefumption who would venture to point out another fpot
upon the globe, to which Ireland fhould now wifii to be removed.
From this proximity of England, I would deduce this truth,
which I wifh to be engraven on the heart of every Irifhman : — Eng¬
land is the only power that can either enfiave us farther, or keep
us as we are. And this is the important moment when our own firm
conftitutional refidance will derive additional fupport from the dread
of her enemies, towards (baking off the (hackles of an ufurping Englifh
people. \
But, unlefs we entertain for each other a mutual and general confi¬
dence, unlefs we Jay afide all rancour of prejudice on account of dif-
tin&ions either political or religious, or attempt fuch a relief from
thofe (hackles, would be only to folicit cCnfufion.
There are, however, many inftances of fiates differing very much
In religon, and yet united in drift civil confederacy and union. Scarce
fix of the Cantons of Switzerland are Protedants, the leven remaining
are Roman Catholics j and, what feems a little extraordinary, the
greater number of the Roman Catholic Cantons are democratical,
that of the Proteftant Cantons ariftocratical in their government. In
the United Provinces the majority of the people are either Prefbyterians
or Roman Catholics, and though Prelbyterianilm is the eftablifhed
religion, yet the toleration or connivance which all fefts meet with
from the government, has produced a general moderation and peace,
and, in its natural conlequences, has added power, grandeur, and
(lability to the (late. The date of Pennfylvania is equally various in
Its religion. The laws of this province are more liberal than the fpirit
of any other provinces. They give no preference to any feft. They
tolerate all fefts. All fefts are therefore not only peaceable but con¬
tent. Mod of the other dates of America, fo firm in their union
againd England, are fcarccly more oppofite than they are inveterate
in the feveral prejudices and opinions which they carried with them
from Europe. In (hort, from all the fafts we can colleft, our uniform
conclufion mud be, — that that nation is mod likely to be great, power¬
ful, and happy, which finds political and civil moderation neceffary to
its very being. Where there are no fefts or parties, I may venture to
fay there cannot be fenfe, fcience, liberty, or commerce. Where,
from circumdances internal or external, different feeds are nearly ba¬
lanced in power, the laws mud be moderate, and the fpirit of the laws
will become the fpirit of the people. The nation will be in harmony
within itfelf, and that moderation and good fenfe which will didin-
guidi it in its internal government and policy, mull charafterife it in
its conduct towards other nations.
It is very fenfibly obferved by a Roman Catholic Pried *, in a late
Addrefs to thofe of his own perfuafion in Ireland, that “ conquerors,
(and, let me add, traders and politicians) are of no religion/' The
* The Rev, Arthur O'Leary.
.( So
Englifti eftabliihed popery in Canada. The French entered into alli¬
ance with Prelbytcrians in North America ; and, I dare fay, would
have done the fame if their Deity had been the fan or a ferpent, an
onion or a monkey, 'file Dutch, it is faid, tread upon the crofs at
Japan, and the Englifh make alliances with Moors and with Indians.
The French are, perhaps, even in religion, as liberal a nation as
any in Europe. I judge not of them by their creeds, confeflions, or
articles of belief : God forbid that. 1 Iliould judge by thefe alone cf
the hearts or urideritandfngs of any people upon earth, who have
public creeds, confeffions, or articles l Thefe are not always formed
by the wiieft or moil religious people of a nation. The w.ifeft and
mod religious are generally better employed. I judge of the French
nation by the general c.ondufl of the people; and l believe it will be
owned that they are more liberal to Englilhmen, than Englifnmen are
to them. The abfurdicy of fuppofing that even .conquerors would
make violent alterations in private property, and involv.e thejnfelves in
the perplexed difputes and antiquated claims of families that have
fullered by forfeiture, has been well expofed by the Reverend Divine
juft mentioned. Were the queftion indeed between two pretenders to
the crown, the cafe might be different. He jvho fuccecded muff rein-
ftate fome of his adherents, and gratify others. This muft be done
at the cxpence of the opp.ofite party. But a conqueror, \vho is not
able to crufli the fubdued nation at a fingle effort, will think himlelf
happy in prevailing upon the people to remain quiet as he found them.
He will make no alteration which he can avoid ; he will avoid every
alteration which can difguft or difpleafe. What then is to be expedl-
ed from even a powerful prot.e&cr,. that offers independence to a nati¬
on fo divided into parties that no one of them has power to crufh the
others, fupported as they wonld be, by the nation that formerly en-
flaved them .? I fay that, in this cafe, we might cxpefl fuch a mode¬
ration as would over-rule every petty diftinctionor jealoufy, and would
unite the nation by community of interest. To make an alteration
in the eftablilhed religion, or to deny to all denominations of Protef-
tant Dilfenters that toleration which they at prefect enjoy, would
be the madnefs of folly. Thofe we fpeak of are neither fools nor
madmen,
The Roman Catholics, might, with juftice indeed, expert a more
compleat toleration. But it would require peculiar delicacy to grant
this without offending thofe Proteftants who at preftnt enjoy but q
toleration themleives. The interference of Roman Catholic protec¬
tors, confcious of the prudence their fituation required, mult be of
the moft temperate kind. The alterations made would be gentle,
gradual, and rather the effect cf an infenlihle alteration of opinion
and removal of prejudice, than an act of force or power in the ftate.
• — And, from the co-operation of all thefe caufes, I am inclined to
think there would naturally arife a mildnefs of government, and a
benevolence of toleration which is unknown to the laws of any other
country in Europe, and which enthuftafm itfelf has fcarce dared to
think confident with the littlenefs of human nature.
But whatever may be the natural dignity an*, ftrength of Ireland,
or whatever advantages ihe might derive from the prelent poiture of
affairs, there arc fome who cannot readily give up their attachment to
t .gs £ •.(&«')
the people of England, or think themfelves juftified in refilling tlieiri
in their prefent Hate of misfortune, while there are others who yet
dread her power, and tremble at her name. To the former I (hall
fpeak more particularly hereafter ; and hope to lhew, that we are not
bound by any ties of duty, gratitude, or honour, to remain in fub-
jeclion to the parliament of England.
At prefent I would addrefs myielf to the . latter. — That the power
of England is not yet an imagination I readily will own. — Great even
yet is the power of England, and great is the memory of her glory !
but her glory lives but in memory, and the (mews of her power
are withered. Exhaufted and foiled by America, whom, in the hour
of her infolence, (lie treated with a contempt that would have robbed
victory of its honour, but has , covered defeat with aggravated difgrace,
returning reafon can fugged: but one confolation for her folly; — that
fomething yet remains for madnefs to fquander, that there is yet a
remnant which penury may fave. The arbitrefs of empires may yet
exift among nations ! the patronefs of nations may yet be an liufwife !
There was a time when the World and the Roman Empire wefe fy-
ftonimoiis terms.
There was a time too when the very name of Rome kept the Pro¬
vinces in awe, tho? llie could fcarce have defended her walls. Eng¬
land has fallen by her own weight, which Ihe wanted wifdom to ba¬
lance. Thofe days are paid in which her hiltory went hand in hand
with romance. France has (truck terror into her conquerers, and
has lhaken the throne of her King ! The Englifh Channel has be¬
come a term of mockery. It has feen the Navy of England in its
flight! The navy of England has left her coafts to be infulted !
That the navy of England was able to fecure the protection of a Port,
has, to a fovereign of England, become a theme of congratulation !
"While England thus protects herfeif need I a(k what protection Ihe
is likely to afford to Ireland ? If we remain by her bad policy in our
prefent impoveriftied (late, can Ihe protect us from the arms or infults
of her* enemies ?
Have we not men in arms already? Men whom England, and the
Haves of England, would long ere this have difarmed; had they dared
to do fo ! Men whofe fpirit they now affeCt to approve, becaufe they find
their approbation is indifferent to them ! Men whofe fpirit mu ft ob¬
tain a momentary protection, and to whom a very little time will ren¬
der protection unneceffary ! Men who may yet teach England that the
foil of their own country benumbs not their courage ; that it is not on
the plains of Flanders or America alone that Irishmen can con¬
quer ! ^
The fubjeCt, my countrymen, has rifen upon me. I have (I hope
you will think unavoidably) been led into fome details. My indigna¬
tion, upon other Occafions, I have found it difficult to reprefs. You
will confider the defign, and pardon any involuntary failure in the ex¬
ecution. But, before I take my leave for the prefent, allow me to
alk one fhort queftion i
Shall we truft to other nations for a temporary protection, which
(judging from human iiaturef, and their particular line ot conduct) I
aver it to be equally their intereft and their inclination to give, and
the bounds of which, as I have endeavoured to prove, they cannot ex-
F
( 82 )
cecd ; or, fhall we depend to eternity on the generofity of a nation
who has fhewn herfelf as incapable of generofity as ot juftice, and
whofe folly has difabled her from performing the duties of either ? —
She thunders forth the mandates of her omnipotence ; but, is her
providence fo particular, fo watchful, fo active, and fo benevolent,
that we fhould leave to her more than the God of Nature demands for
himfeif, — that we fhould leave agency to her, and addrefs her but in
prayer ? Is the night of religious fuperftition pafied away, and muft
that of political idolatry ufurp the rightful viciflitude o.t day? Our
night of both has been iufficiently long ! But the fun or England, in
whofe meridian beams our feebler light was loft,, is now fet, — perhaps,
for ever ; and the Hefperian bar of America, which let with England,
for a time, is now rifen, a Lucifer to light us into day. It has mov¬
ed, till it is vertical in glory, and points to our. political salva¬
tion !
LETTER THIRD.
YO U have heard, my countrymen, the fpeech of the Minifter !
You have heard it, and 1 hope it has funk deep into your hearts,
and added fervour to that loyalty which is now the only cement of
the empire, and which the confibency of Minibers has therefore la¬
boured to deftroy !
You mud alfo before this have been acquainted with two political
phenomena which this age has produced : Some of our Irifh common-
law Judges deteb fo much all Englifh importations *, that they will
not, on a conbitutional quefiion, admit a fingle conbrudtion that is
liberal ! But there is a fecond to which the fil'd is as nothing. A
Chancellor of Ireland, an Englifhman, entertains fueh a regard to
the Irifh laws (in their prefent date of purity) that he will not ven¬
ture even to judge of them by equity, and good confcience ! Nay,
where his Sovereign has been unguarded in approving of exertions
not the mod conditutional, he will corredl his Sovereign though
fpeaking from the Throne !
Led, however, fo rare an indance of integrity fhould be offenfive to
the Minider, I would beg leave to offer for it a very fimple apology.
—His LorcUhip is keeper of the King’s Irish confcience. — He knows
the heart of his gracious mader, and that, if he erred, it was but
in words !
But to return to the Speech, (from which it may be doubted if I
have really digreded) I could wilh, my Countrymen, that, by con¬
necting thofe parts of it which are, accidentally, thrown at the greateft
poflible didance, you would colled its beginning and end, it fiim and
fpirit. For there you will fee that the trade and commerce of this
kingdom are objefts too “ great and important” for an Irifh parlia-
* Set r Lord Mansfield's decifions.
• ' t 83 )
ment to deliberate on, till the general tranquillity is reftored, and
England can affift her, in the deliberation, by her Parliament and
army ! But you will fee, at the fame time, that it would be very pro¬
per to give ferious attention to the PrOteftant Charter Schools and the
Linen Manufacture ; the regulation of thefe being wife, necelfary,
and above all, domellic : — They relate not, it is acknowledged, to
your dearelt interefts, but, to compenfate for this defeCt, they “ will
not impede your efforts”— (as an attention to “great and important
objects” might do) — by calling down upon your heads the injured
omnipotence of England.
Such, my Countrymen, is the marrow of this elaborate and truly
minifterial production ! 1 Ihould have palled it over, as I would do all
productions that are intended to have as little meaning as poffible,
left the meaning they have Ihould be difeovered to be a bad one. But
amidft its laboured inconfiftency, and in the conduCt of its official
fupporters, there appears fo much of the genuine fpirit of Englifh ty¬
ranny, of a tyranny that relents not at our loyalty nor our poverty,
and pays a meafured deference to our fpirit, that I thought 1 could
not chufe a more proper introduction to my propofed letter on the in¬
dependence of Ireland.
A fenfible, and, I believe, a very honeft Member of the Englifh
Parliament, (Sir Cecil Wray) after giving a defeription of our man¬
ners and fituation, concludes with telling us, that “ he has little hope3
of our ruin being prevented.”
A late moll able and fpirited writer obferves, that “ the constitution
is now reduced to a ftate in which no public benefit can be ob¬
tained but by the collective body of the people.” If this cannot be
doubted, the queilion is only concerning the mode and object of the
interpofition.
If any public benefit can be obtained, or if our ruin can be pre¬
vented, it muft, I think, be by one of thefe three meafures : — By a
Union with England; by associations to confume our own manu¬
factures, and to learn the ufe of arms ; or by throwing off all de¬
pendence upon the people and parliament of England, declaiming
all political connection with the latter but through our common So¬
vereign, and protecting for the future our feparate lights as Irifhmen
and as men. Thefe ultimately refolve themielves- into the following
queftion, “ Is independence worth contending for If any thing fhort
of independence will prevent our ruin, or obtain inch a public benefit
as Ihould content the collective body of the people, to aim at inde¬
pendence would be either villany or madnefs, I fhall therefore con¬
sider each of thefe mealures feparately, and with perfeCt freedom. If
the laws allow not fuch freedom, they muft be fenfible of their own
weaknefs, and we Ihould be equally lo. To tolerate fuch laws is to
folicit their farther corruption. If, in Ireland, and in the opinion of
Iriffimen, it is become treafon to our Sovereign, to add to his dignity
by making his people free, I have loft all idea of loyalty, and as I
have lived a traitor, a traitor I muft die. If it is at prefent, ia Ire¬
land, and in the opinion of Iriffimen, a public crime to think too well
of one’s country, it will foon be fcarcely poffible to commit a crime in
this country. Ireland will foon have neither government nor men !
F %
( )
The late Mr. ftume, in one of his political effays, I think,
has faid of Ireland, that “ it is an enflaved nation, the indi¬
viduals of which are free.’’ If the individuals of a nation are
•free under the government, they mull be very unreafonable indi¬
viduals if they are not content ; for the government is nothing to them
but as it procures them this freedom. But I will not fcruple to affirm
that the obfervation is a contradiction in terms, and one of thofe con¬
tradictions, which are but too apt to miflead the inattentive, and to
be abufed by the defigning. The individuals of Ireland compofe the
nation of Ireland. The nation is enflaved— -yet the individuals that
compofe it, are perfectly free!
A body is compofed of parts or particles ; the whole has a certain
quality (of flavery) yet not a Angle particle of that body has a por¬
tion of that quality ! This feems mightily philofophic ; and yet Hume
was a materialift ! I do not think, however, that he believed in an
infallible church compofed of fallible individuals ! — That Ireland is
enflaved, few who know its Atuation can doubt ; but to thofe who do,
the courfe of the fubjeCl will furnifli proofs but too inconteftable.—
Her people then, as individuals, cannot be free.
As to the Englifli cftnflitution itfelf, (that boafted model of perfec¬
tion and incorruptibility!) its modern hiftory will, to molt people, I
believe, appear ftriclure fufficient. — If perfeCl, it could not have been
corrupted. — If it did not admit mal-adminiflration, it could not have
been fo ill adminiftered.
The prophecy of Montefquieu is already fulfllled. — The legiflative
power of England is become more corrupt than the executive. Thro'
that corruption the executive commands the legiflative, and, in effeCt,
they are one; — this is nearly the deftruCtion of defpotifm ! yet I al¬
low that even forms are fometimes material — The Grand Seignior may
take off the head of his fubjeCt — “ but he cannot force him to drink
wine !” Could he do euery thing, his power would be intolerable.—
An Englifli King cannot tax his fubjeCts without the confent of their
Reprefentatives, who mud at the fame tax themfelves, nor can he take
awray the life of a Angle individual unlefs convicted by his Peers. But
he can induce the Reprefentative to untie the purfe of the nation,
and he may unlhcath the iword of war, which may involve the half
of his fubjeffs in ruin, and expofe the other half to the invading
fword of the enemy.
When Sir William Blackftone, (B. i. 336.) after a formidable enu¬
meration of the real powers of the King, through influence, the
handing army, and the perpetual revenue, tells his countrymen, al-
moft in fo many words, that their chief dependance is on the perfonal
character of their King : it is not entirely a compliment paid by the
courtier ; it is a truth extorted from the lawyer, and which the cour¬
tier would palliate *.
ylfter the enumeration above mentioned , Sir William J}rucky as it Jhould
fe-em , by the terror of it , tells us how much, till half a dozen htlplefs pof-
Jibilities fball happen, “ it will be our efpecial duty , as good fubjefts and
good Engliflomen , to guard againfi its influence — and , above every thing ,
to hope that we may long , very long , continue to be governed by-— our pre -
Jent Sovereign— avkoy in all bis perfonal ads, has fbewn fuch veneration
( ,*s )
If fucli be the government of England, what mud we fay of that
of Ireland? — Montefquieu doubts whether a flave be capable of a Tin¬
gle virtue* What then muft be the virtue of a nation that is enflaved ?
Honour may fupport the individual, but the abjedfion of a nation is in*
famy indeed ! When this abjedtion is once eftablilhed, a virtuous, in¬
dependant and fpirited individual is, if I may be allowed the expredi¬
on, one of the miracles of nature ! Corruption in a dependant nation
is the very malignity of corruption. In pafling through a multitude,
and through the fervants of fervants, in dead of being filtered, it ac¬
quires fuccedive contamination.
In this kingdom the power of chufing Reprefentatives in Parlia¬
ment, the only public and conditutional exertion of liberty in which
the people are allowed to bear a part, is under Englifh government,
reduced to this : — It is the liberty of chufing the men who fhall betray
us, or adt as mourners to the ceremony. — It is a gloomy pidlure, my
countrymen, if that can be called a pi<5ture which is almoft all a fhade.
In drawing it I have felt as varioufly as the man who retraces tho
character of a friend of whom the world thought meanly, becaufe
misfortune, that expofed his vices, cad a fhade over his virtues. — The
days of your misfortunes, my countrymen, have been out-numbered
by the inlults you have differed !
But a change is at hand ! u Every man will bring you apiece or
money, and everyone an ear-ring of gold. — Your latter end will be
more bleffed than your beginning !’*
But how may thefe things be ? By a union — by associations —
or by independence ? — I feel the whole weight of the fubjedt, and itr
is the confcioufnefs that I am fo far not unworthy of it, that urges
me to undertake a queftion under which I (hould otherwife defpair.
The author of the letter to the people of Ireland, which 1 lately
mentioned, has on the fubjedt of a Union thrown into a very few pages
what might furnifh an ordinary writer with matter for a volume ; a
few of them I fhall repeat, fincc it is difficult to add to them. I may
perhaps endeavour to illuftrate fome of them, and to this purpofe I
hope the obfervations juft made, will fomewhat contribute. —
The firft leading and comprehenfive obfervaticn upon a union, one
indeed that makes all others appear almoft unnecelfary, is that by it
we lofe our own legifiative affembly, and take the readied means of
deftroying the only one that fhall remain of the empire. Already,
God knows, there is little occafion to add to the corruption of the
Britifh Parliament! Yet what muft we expedt, if we pour into it fuch
another “ uniform and potent body of corruption” as has flowed
from Scotch Reprefentatiyes !
We have now fome {lender ties upon the fears, at leaft, of our Par¬
liament. We fhould then have none. Our prefent Abfentees, (f men
as dependant on the Minifter, as they are independant of the people,”
are not more likely to be incorruptible than the deputies of Scotland.
** Upon the ruins of (what remains to us of) national confequence
and public fentiment, we fhould have a few individuals, infigiiificant
fir our free conJlitutiony — and will therefore never harbour a thought —
detrimental to public liberty " — Thus does public liberty depend upon the
virtue of a King!.
( 86 )
in England, ingroffing the powers of Ireland, jobbing away Her inte-
reft, never ref-ding with her people, and, of courfe, ignorant of her
condition; and unawed by her refentment.,,
That no reprefentation could elfentially ferve Ireland, may be col¬
lected from this ; that her number of deputies being necelfarily fmali
in proportion to thofe of England, even if not corrupted, they would
be overpowered in every queftion between the two nations. -
The tyranny which England now indulges 3 gain ft Ireland, contrary
to every principle of the conftitution, fhe would then difplay in appa¬
rent conformity to it. — Even a union could not make her feel for Ire¬
land as the does for her own moft inlignilicant village.
We are by nature her rival, and, in loine refpedts, I may even fay,
herfuperior. Our quota, or proportion, of taxes muft be fixed. Can
any man then be fo bigotted to the idea that political generofity exifts,
and exifts in England, as to fuppofe fhe would encourage her rival
much beyond what would enable her to pay that quota of taxes ? But,
allowing England to be generous to us, at prefent, muft the not foon
hate us with as much cordiality and as much juftice, as fhe now does
Scotland? The conduct of the nation and her reprefentalives would
juftify it. - Nations will not return good for evil, however ulual
that may be with individuals f — In this fituation* is there a noble
fcheme in agitation for the improvement or manufactures, the opening
of communications between different parts of this kingdom, the con¬
venience or extenfion of trade— -Is an inland Canal to be cut, a Col¬
liery to be promoted, a Quay, a Mole, or Dock to be built, — is it
wifhed to improve or put in a ftate of defence any of thofe harbours
which open to the world, and have capacity to receive it — Immedi¬
ately an hoft of petitions are oppofed, — or the Minifter is thre ttenecl
with an infurrection — perhaps railed by himfelf — The fcheme drops ;
— or it is procured by means the moft disgraceful cr moft ruinous — •
Jobbing is feldom gratuitous — Compliments muft be returned. T he
empire fullers. They luffed who receive juftice as a favour. At any
rate their fpirit is deftroyed, for they leel their dependence and their
impotence.
When to this confideration, lo fufflcient in itielf, we add a number
of others and none of them inconfiderable I think there are few who
wall fee caufe for a moment’s hefitation.
Such are the incumbrances England would lay upon our infant com¬
merce, a burthen fuppofed too heavy for the maturity of hers ; Inch
too is the vaft encreafe of abfentee-intereft in her deputies to England,
and their connedions ; in our nobility, and all others polfelfed of large
landed property ; in the votaries of pleafure, who now lpend part of
the year in Dublin, but would then follow the legiflature and the deity
to London ; while our manufacturers muft be fo far unemployed,
agriculture, fo intimately connected with manufacturers, muft fuller ;
the tenantry muft groan under rack rents and agents.— Such in confe-
quence of the proceeding, would be the ruin of Dublin, without
any very effential or comparative advantage to the other parts of this
kingdom, all of which would be proportionally deferted, unemployed,
or injured — Such as remitting of the revenues to England, with the
fupernumerary expences, making a great part of revenue; with a land-
tax an entirely new one, and infeparable from an union, and all the
( 87 )
other indefinite and ruinous payments ; fo that Ireland would be a
country confiding of merchants, lawyers, revenue officers and pea-
fants, annually remitting to England the produce of trade, land and
revenue.”
We come now to confider the effects of associations ; and here,
though 1 ffiould allow the writer fo often quoted that all the advan¬
tages he expects, or all the nation has a right to demand, would accrue
from them, if rigidly adhered to, yet I cannot help thinking that the
Affociations themfelves will ffiortly melt away, unlefs they have a far¬
ther object than merely the freedom of trade, or what is generally
called “ the defence of our idand.” I mean not to depreciate Adoci-
ations. They were a “ meafure of neceffity,” and they are now as
neceffary as ever. I mean not to depreciate the merit of thofe friends
to their country, whole generous indignation and zeal firft convinced
her of their neceffity. If there is a fpirit now in Ireland, and if that
fpirit is likely to continue ; if Ireland is not funk beneath hope, — it is
due, under Heaven, to the fpirit and abilities of thofe who fil'd roufed
her from that deep which feemed as the deep of death. But I ftill
mud think that Alfociations are but a fil'd dep which ffiould lead to the
final one ;,or, to exprefs myfelf more clearly, that the objedt hitherto
propofed by them being infufficient, that is, not aiming at the root of
the difeafe, they will not only be unequal to its cure, but perhaps oc-
cafion a relapfe that may he inveterate or mortal.
M Firmness alone can save us.” For the opinion England enter¬
tains of our firmnefs, confult the Speech of che Minider. Is it not
temporizing and equivocal in every fentence ? Does it not applaud and
condemn, Batter and infult us in a breath ?
Look to the government of England ! Look to her government over
us. Look to our people differing under both thefe ; then tell me who
can, that while thefe exid our Affociations can be lading.
The fame radical fault in our prefent conditution, which rendered
Affociations neceffary, will, while it continues, defeat them. They
will be fapped as the conditution was dedroyed. 1 he fame power
which renders abortive allharely “ internal refolutions of individuals,”
will gradually undermine our ££ written covenants and I do not
think afingle argument can be ufed to prove the neceffity of thefe lad,
that will not demondrate that even they will not bind — if the power
of the Engliffi Parliament over this country dial! continue.
In all the Affociations there is a condition either expreffed or necef-
farily implied. We affociate, during the time that England lliaii con¬
tinue her unjud, illiberal, and impolitic reftri&ions, &c. Were it
otherwife, we ffiould but imitate the condind we condemn.
But who ffiali determine when England has ceafed to be unjud, &c ?
When ffie has taken off a fufficient number of thofe redridions ?
When the people of Ireland ought to be content for the prefent, and
ffiould accept her promifes for the future ? Who is to determine all
thefe points ? Every individual for himfelf. Are the fubferibers bound
exprefsly to wait the decifion and concurrence of the majority? I be¬
lieve there is no indance of it, and if there were, it would be nugato¬
ry. In all voluntary Affociations, where there is not a power edablifli-
ed to keep men to them, (which power, though formed upon the iree-
cd principles, mud, to be effeffual, be in a degree arbitrary,) the
( 38 )
AiTociators will judge how far the majority itfelf, whom they bound
themfelves to obey, adhered to the primitive intention of the Alfociation
or what they wilt call the fpirit of the conftituticn. This fpirit will be
what every individual conceived it to be at firft, conceives it now to be,
on maturer reflection, or chufes to conceive it, for motives known to
himfelf. Some may for a while be retained in the- croud by indolence,
by fhanae, or want of fpirit ; but when once a few break through the
rules, and give their reafons with plaufibility and boldnefs, efpecially
if the multitude fed any inconvenience from their virtue, or thofe
who draw off, gain any advantage by their cccefiion, — the written co¬
venant of all degenerates into the internal refolution of each indivi¬
dual. — How forcible that is we have heard powerfully explained!
Kings who trufted too far to an oath of allegiance, in which the con¬
dition perhaps was not expreifed, but is, of neceffity implied, have
found that they could do wrong, and their fubjefts redrefs it. If the
people take not the hint, the wrong that is done they may be unable
to redrefs,
The two yvavs by which \ye can enforce the covenant, will, I think,
fcarcely bear a dole examination. We may 44 agree never to vote for,
but ever againft fuch perfons as refufe to fign.” But when thole who
fign, may have plaufible reafons for drawing off, and few can judge
of their linearity ; and when thofe who are to judge are little more
likely to be fmcere than the men whofe conduct they examined, and
perhaps have imitated, what becomes of 44 the people’s balance in the
(prefent) conftitution or where,' efpecially in the beginning of the
period, is the great benefit of the' Octennial Bill ? Are we not again
and again betrayed, and do we not again and again return our betray¬
ers ? None want their fufficient reafons for their conduct, whatever it
is ; nor do any want people to whom their reafons are fuffici mt. Where
the Government is corrupt, all are too much alike.
The fecond method of enforcing the covenant will turn out as inef¬
fectual. 44 We may publifh the name of the draper and mercer who
refufes the covenant, and perfids to import, and we may agree never
more to deal with him.” 'But drapers and mercers are of no country
or party. T he body of them will go with the croud, and leave the
cuflorn of the virtuous few to the virtuous mercer ; a cuftom very edi¬
fying and very profitable to both parties ! Suppofe, however, what is
not very probable, that we mail not be flattered out of our AlTociati-
ons by fome paltry confideration ; fuppofe that our Afiociations will
Band the fhock of authority, and the undermining of influence. Will
England grant us the advantages of an Union unlefs wc lubmit to the
burthens? We fhall probably excite her obilinacy ; (for her obftinacy
maybe excited!) cordiality between the nations will be gradually di-
minifhed ; our prefent government mav be rendered Hill worfe by ob-
firu«flion, no fcheme being on foot to improve it ; the nation, uncer¬
tain of its interefts, and unfleady in its wifhes, will be expofed to its
enemies at home and abroad ; and it will either be teafed into an union,
attacked with advantage by foreign' enemies, or driven, at a more un¬
favourable time, into an attempt at independence. If it appears then,
that of the only three means by which the people can interpofe to pre¬
vent their ruin, a union would be almoft in every view ineligible, and
that the moil lading Ailbciatioos, while the power of the Engliih Par-
(89')
liament oyer tliis country fhall continue, wiil he far from affording us
effe&ual and compleat relief; we are driven upon independence, as
“ a meafure of neceflity.” The alternate is legiflative independence
or ruin.
I might here, my countrymen, eiofe the argument. — It is already
compleat. If we we can trace all our misfortunes, the deftru&ion of
our liberty and the failure of every public fcheme, to the power of
England and our unfortunate connexion with her, we muft throw off
her power and Abjure her connexion, before we can either be free or
happy. \
Still, however, a few fcruples may remain with fome, and to enu¬
merate a few of the advantages of legiflative independence will not
only (hew its own intrinfic value, but evince ftill farther its fuperiority
to all that can proceed from the mod plauflble Union, and all hitherto
propofed from the moil effe&ual affociation.
I begin with the firft and moil comprehenfive advantage ; — that, in
efFe«fh which will give rife to every other. Iuftead of being allied, or
infeparably united to the interefts of an old empire, tottering under a
decay of nature, hurried on by her vices, we fhould enjoy in our
own renewed cbnftitutipn all the foundnefs, virtue, and vigour, of
youth. That word of all corruptions, introduced by the word of all
tyrannies— that of the corrupt Parliament of a fuperior and degene¬
rate nation, — would be removed. The intered of the governors and
of the people, now fo oppoflte, would be reconciled. We fhould be our
own governors, for the nation would be free to purfue her own intered
under her fovereign, who would be more free to indulge her. Public
fpirit would fliake off the defpair of centuries. Public virtue would
have an objedf, and private virtue, the virtue of the people, would at
once be the ipring, the effedt, and the cement of the government.
I have endeavoured to fhew that our peculiar fltuation, being di-
vided internally by difference of religion, and being equally near to
, oppreflion and protection, mud naturally producp a government of
I the very milded form, and whofe firb and ruling principle mud be to¬
leration. How far this would contribute to the happinefs, greatnefs,
and dability of the date, as it would afford an afylum and encourage¬
ment to arts, indudry, and virtue, let the former errors of France,
the prudence and indudry of Holland, and the great and amiable
virtues of Pennfylvania, unfold and enforce unto the minds of all
who have hearts to give fair play to their underbandings !
A confequence of our legiflative independence, and of tfle youth,
wifdom, and moderation, of our government, would be our being
unconcerned in the wars of any other nation, from which we reap
much danger and lofs, but no poflible profit, no poflible honour : and
we Ihould be neither tempted nor inclined to enter into any purfelves.
In every unhappy neceflity of that kind, we Ihould defend our¬
felves ; we Ihould be prepared to do fo both by land and by lea, indead
of being left expofed and defencelefs by rhofe who had brought us into
danger, and being obliged to acknowledge as a favour the alms of
our fuperior.
We fhould have a free and univerfal trade, unchecked by the mif-
taken jealoufy, or real rivalry, of England. All parts of the nation
would be equally attended to by a legiflacure that had an equal intered
( 9° )
in all parts, and that would be native, refident, uncorrupted, and un¬
fettered. It is here to be remarked, that from the very nature of trade,
which is an exchange of the fuperfluities of one nation for the wants
of another, England is the laid country on earth with whom Ireland
can trade to advantage, and Ireland is the lad country upon earth
whofe trade alone can be an object to England. The fpirit of trade is a
fpiric ot equality. It is equally inconliftent with a fpirit of mo¬
nopoly or revenue. Now the produce of England and Ireland
is the fame. There can be no trade between the nations that does '
not arife from the inferiority of industry or fkill in one of them,
and in trading with other nations they are rivals. The inferior nation
muE then be opprelfed in exadt proportion to her comparative advan¬
tages. Hence we may account for the freedom of Ireland under
Englilh government before trade was imderitood, and the laboured 1
chfeouragement which her induftry has invariably received fince its I
progrefs in Europe.
Trade alfumed a new face in Europe, from the difeovery of the paf- '
fage to the Haft Indies by the Cape of Good Hope. This happened in i
the reign of Henry VII. and in his reign, through the influence
of his Viceroy, Sir Edward Poynings, Ireland gave up her indepen¬
dence by giving up the propoflng of laws, which, in every free go- ,
vernment, belongs to the people. They who give up one important
right will fee others ulurped. Ireland then fubmitted to the trammels
of England, and, as might be expected, fhe has not only worn them )
ever lince, but they have been regularly and unconftitutionally en- j
creafed.
The juftice of England ended where her interell commenced. Her
injuftice will end but with her power.
From the independence of Ireland which will afford an object, fcope,
and field, for arts, induftry, and genius, we fnall not only fecure the
refidence of our great men, who will find that refidence both agreea¬
ble and neceffary to their intereft, but we (hall acquire that name of
which we are not barely deprived, — but which heightens the infolence
and infults of our tyrants. England now fhines with light borrowed
from her fatelite.
“ There is a fpirit in man as well as an under (landing !” They are
equally infpired by the Almighty j and he who fullers his fpirit to de¬
generate, as much as if he allowed his undsrftanding to be corrupted,
dilhonours his Creator by his disfiguring his image.
Has the Almighty (lamped folly- upon the forehead, or written
Coward upon the heart of an Irilhman ? Is he an afs, that he lhould
crouch under every burden ? or a ftone, that lie lhould be infenfible
to infult : — Are Engliflimen gods, that we lhould worlhip them? Shines
there a glory round them, before which the face of an Irilhman lhould
be hid ?
Seldom, my countrymen, (and never in the feat of our flavery) have
we met them upon equal terms ; — but when we did, I truft we have
not been difgraced f — Our unhappy exiles, vidtims to her policy, have
proved that there is a day of retribution, of which the wil'eft are not
aware. They have proved that thofe may avenge their country whom
their country has proferibed, or whom the policy of its tyrants has
rendered it unable to fupport.
( 9> )
If they themfelves think us inferior to them as men, whence is it
that they reftrain ourinduftry, by the ufurpation of their parliament ?
And whence is it that our industry Iras fometimes overcome all re-
llraints ? Whence is it that they deceived us into an inequitable ex¬
change of a manufacture in which we excelled, for one of which we
were totally ignorant ; and when we acquired fuperiority in the new*
one, robbed us of the poor produce of that inequitable bargain ?
Whence is it that they thought they muft fuffer from our freedom,
and robbed us of Magna Chart a, the common gift of nature, con¬
firmed to us by our King? — Whence is it that they fupport their ufur-
pations by violating every principle of the conftitution, trying us twice
for the fame offence, and depriving us of trial “ by our country and
our peers ?”f Whence is it that they think our induftry can thrive
under every reftraint, and that they not only load us witKpenfions to
their hirelings, but hand us over to the plunder of their needy Lords,
and defpicable adventurers ? — When all thefe queftions are anfwered,
I will alk another: — By what tie of gratitude or honour, are we
bound to remain fubjeCt to the people of England -
Yes, my Countrymen, we owe them all the gratitude which injuries
and infults can infpire ! They know our force, and their art has been
exhaufted to make us appear contemptible both to others and to our-
felves.
Are we not chronicled in all Englilh “ Abllracts of the Times,” as
blunderers and blockheads ? Do we ever appear upon their- ftage but
to divert their mightinelfes, byabfurdity, and to tickle their hot vanity
by felf-complaccnt comparifon? Have vre courage ? It is the courage
pf a brute. Senie ? It is the (lightly half-confidering fenfe of a mad¬
man. Generofity or feeling ? 'They are untinCtured or unreftrained
by a fmgle principle of morality. ,
The Gentleman , that character which marks the man, and which
is (lamped with the uniform and univerfal currency of ages and of
nations— that character has never yet been attributed to an Irifh-
man ! Meannefs fubmits to the imputation. Good-humour keeps up
the jefl. Its authors, however, are half-difpofed to believe it (they
have too much reafon in our poverty of fpirit!) and the etiquette of
the ftage and of jocularity is as eilablilhed and as abfolute as the court
of a Viceroy. Thofe who have not dignity at home mud expert
contempt abroad. — Ye, who have travelled, fay, which of you had
the courage to announce yourfelves as Irifhmen!
But, we need not be furprifed at the infults received by thofe whofc
paffiyenels feems to court them. Other nations meet the fame fate
from Englilh juftice and generofity. They allow not gallantry to a
'oe; and for rival they have fcarce in their language another name
than that of natural enemy. Let us appeal to the fame brief chro¬
nicle — the (lage of each country. We (hall there fee, that if the
French fometimes throw into an Englifh character a few oddities and
ixcentricicies, if they make him extravagant, or outre, in his love oi
iberty and contempt of authority, they Hill give him the fuperior
qualities that command the admiration of the underftandmg and the
enthufiafm of the heart. The Englilh never introduce a Frenchman,
■f For offences againfl the Woollen Aft, io and 11 William 111. fee a
eminent ary on this extraordinary aft in the letters of Caufidicus .
( gi )
but to flatter the fpleen of their pride, to entertain their galleries, or
to heighten the brutal prejudices of their mob. They ornament his
mind with every thing that is ludicrous in vanity, mean in cowardice,
and truckling in avarice, and on his perfon and drefs they exhauft
caricature. — The French give the English all the firmnefs, fpirit, and
dignity of the man. The Englilh confer upon the French all the
meannefs, milchief, and mimic kry of a monkey.
If then, my countrymen, we have the feelings of men, and will
not be infulted as Haves, if we aim at having a rank, a character, a
name in the world, let us re-affume them in the face of the world !
Who are they that lhall oppofe us ? — Is it our fovereign ? It cannot be!
He knows his intereft ; he remembers that we are loyal; he remem¬
bers that we also are his people. — Is it the People or the Parlia¬
ment of England? They dare not. — The prophecies of thofe generous
individuals, who cried out again ft the exceffes of the nation, will at
length have gained fome credit by their completion. If they fhould
not - but I cannot make a fuppofition that would be abfurd and un¬
natural !
Shall we facrifice our own great interefts, the great interefts of
pofterity, the firft-born, the gifted, of every age, of every art,
of every fciencc, at the altar of that idol, England ? Shall we
aim at an unmerited, an unprofitable, a ruinous generofity, — or lhall
We, by taking care of ourselves at prefent, make it possible for us ‘
one day to be generous to others — even to her who never was juft to
us ? Shall we continue the Haves of a finking nation, and, as fuch,
inferred to the very heart with her vices, but incapable of her virtues,
—-or fliall we, by one nobler effort, throw off the dead weight upon
our virtue and liappinefs, and encourage every feed of greatnefs,
which fo long has lain unvegetating under a load of fertility, or which
every wind ha$ wafted to the foil of our opprefTors ? Could we, by
joining England in her ftruggle with misfortune, prolong her hour of
liberty and virtue, the world might gain by a friendlhip which no na¬
tion ever yet has exhibited, and we Ihould be juftified. But her ful-
nefs of time is come. We cannot prevent her linking. Shall we allow
her to grafp us in her dying convulfion, and pull us with her to the
bottom ? When her very breath is peftijence, her touch is death,
fball we, with the abfurdity of a Turk, refufe to change her atmof-
phere for a purer, and cling to difeafe and to corruption, as if folly
were virtue, prefumption piety ? We lhall not, my countrymen I
Our eyes are opened, our fpirit is rifen, and our reprefentatives have ■
caught a portion of the flame! They no longer can be fatisfied with
“ temporising expedients 1” They will ftrike at the root of the dif¬
eafe ; not attempting to fkin and film the ulcerous part, will they leave
the nation ftill a prey to the ranknefs ot corruption ! Their opportu¬
nity is glorious, and their prudence will embrace it I They will not
leave the people to confider their own dignity, nor lay up for
thcmfelves the vain and mortifying regret, of being unable to goyern
thofe whpm they wanted fpirit to lead.
Tarquin having murdered the father and brother of the firft Bru¬
tus, took him into his care, and, in kindnefs to his inoffenfive fimpli-
city, or in pity to his folly, feized for his ufe, the lands and revenues
of his family. Brutus was the Handing jeft of the Court* Boys,
( 93 )
dunces, dotards, aimed their dull, pointlefs fhafts at him. If he al*
lowed himfelf a retort, its finefle gave furprize, but excited no fufpi-
cion. It was the bolt of a fool lhot by accident. He repreffed his
indignation, and bad his mighty foul lie {till: the time was yet unripe.
At length accident gave the word. The dagger of Lucretia produc¬
ed that effedt, which poetic fancy has given to the fpear of Ithuriel.
The fool darted into a hero I His fmothered indignation burft forth
like a torrent. The tyrants had fcaree time to be amazed. They
were fwept from their feats 5 and a nation of slaves became a na¬
tion OF HEROES !
THE END.
»
#
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11